Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Access method extendability

On 3/28/16 1:26 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Alexander Korotkov wrote: On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: .. Oh crap. I just noticed I forgot to update a comment in pg_dump's getAccessMethods. And we're missing psql tab-complete support for the

Re: [HACKERS] pthread portability

Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Michael McConville wrote: > > The below diff fixes one problem: you can't compare pthread_t values > > directly. Only the function pthread_equal(3) is defined. Direct > > comparison usually works because most implementations define > > pthread_t as an integer type. > > So

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

On 3/29/16 11:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: David Steele wrote: On 3/29/16 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Repurposing COMMERROR is definitely starting to seem like a low-impact solution compared to these others. Under what circumstances would you be wanting hide-from-client with an elevel

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

Alvaro Herrera writes: > David Steele wrote: >> On 3/29/16 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Repurposing COMMERROR is definitely starting to seem like a low-impact >>> solution compared to these others. Under what circumstances would you >>> be wanting hide-from-client with

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

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > "Shulgin, Oleksandr" writes: > > I've just seen that this patch doesn't have a reviewer assigned > anymore... > > I took my name off it because I was busy with other things and didn't > want to

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

On 2016-03-29 12:38:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > On 2016-03-29 12:28:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > If we invent LOG_ONLY (feel free to bikeshed the name), we could later > redefine it as (LOG | ERR_HIDE_FROM_CLIENT), if we ever upgrade the > underlying

Re: [HACKERS] Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-03-28 11:48:46 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >> > What's sizeof(BufferDesc) after applying these patches? It should better >> > be <= 64...

Re: [HACKERS] multivariate statistics v14

Hi Tomas, On 3/28/16 4:42 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: Yes, those are valid omissions. I plan to address them, and I'd also considering adding a section to 65.1 (How the Planner Uses Statistics), explaining more thoroughly how the planner uses multivariate stats. It looks you need post a new

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

The 2016-03 commitfest is nearly over! There are still a number of patches in need of review and a few that still have no reviewer (https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/?status=1=-2). Needs review: 28 (was 55 last week) Needs *reviewer*: 4 (was 12 last week) If you are signed up to review a

Re: [HACKERS] Using quicksort for every external sort run

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 11:18 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > Note that amcheck V2, which I posted just now features tests for > external sorting. The way these work requires discussion. The tests > are motivated in part by the recent strxfrm() debacle, as well as by > the need to

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Access method extendability

And here it is. It's not perfect but it's better (I am not native speaker either). It's same as v12, just changed comments somewhat. Thank you, but I have a problems with applying: % patch -p1 < ~/Downloads/0002-generic-xlog.13.patch Hmm... Looks like a new-style context diff to me... ...

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

"Shulgin, Oleksandr" writes: > I've just seen that this patch doesn't have a reviewer assigned anymore... I took my name off it because I was busy with other things and didn't want to discourage other people from reviewing it meanwhile. I do hope to get to it

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: >> On 2016-03-29 12:28:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >>> My proposal would be to invent a new elevel macro, maybe LOG_ONLY, >>> for this purpose. But under the hood it'd be the same as

Re: [HACKERS] Password identifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol

[This is a rather informal user-review] Here are some thoughts and experiences on using the new features, I focused on testing the basic funcionality of setting password_encryption to scram and then generating some users with passwords. After that, I took a look at the documentation,

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

Andres Freund writes: > There's a number of cases during early startup/auth where we really > don't want client to get messages. Right, which we handle at present with ClientAuthInProgress. But I think it's worth drawing a distinction between "don't send message to client

Re: [HACKERS] Sequence Access Method WIP

Hi Petr, On 3/28/16 3:11 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: fabrizio@bagual:~/pgsql $ bin/pg_dump > /tmp/fabrizio.sql pg_dump: [archiver (db)] query failed: ERROR: column "sequence_name" does not exist LINE 1: SELECT sequence_name, start_value, increment_by, CASE WHEN i... ^

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

Robert Haas wrote: > Yeah, I think it's dead certain that such code exists, and, ahem, not > only in our tree. I suspect that EDB is not the only organization > that has written code that involves comparing error levels. Putting > the flags in the low-order bits seems like it might be workable,

Re: [HACKERS] Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

On 2016-03-29 13:09:05 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2016-03-28 11:48:46 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote: > >> On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > >> > What's sizeof(BufferDesc) after

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Access method extendability

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 6:20 PM, David Steele wrote: > On 3/28/16 1:26 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > >> Alexander Korotkov wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera < >>> alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> .. Oh crap. I just noticed I forgot to

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

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Shulgin, Oleksandr < oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> "Shulgin, Oleksandr" writes: >> > Yes, I now recall that my actual concern was that sample_cnt may

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

David Steele wrote: > On 3/29/16 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >Repurposing COMMERROR is definitely starting to seem like a low-impact > >solution compared to these others. Under what circumstances would you > >be wanting hide-from-client with an elevel different from LOG, anyway? > > In pgaudit

Re: [HACKERS] extend pgbench expressions with functions

Hello Robert, If we don't nuke it, it'll never die. Hearing no objections, BOOM. FIZZ! :-) Thanks for the commits, and apology for the portability bugs. -- Fabien. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

On 3/29/16 12:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Alvaro Herrera writes: David Steele wrote: On 3/29/16 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Repurposing COMMERROR is definitely starting to seem like a low-impact solution compared to these others. Under what circumstances would you be

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

On 2016-03-29 18:33:19 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > A couple years back I proposed making thinks like COMERROR into flags | > ed into elevel, rather than distinct levels. I still think that's a > better approach; and it doesn't force us to forgo using distinct log > levels.

Re: [HACKERS] PoC: Partial sort

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 4:56 PM, David Steele wrote: > On 3/23/16 8:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > This looks like an old change you missed: >> >> - * compare_path_fractional_costs >> + * compare_fractional_path_costs >> >> All in all, this looks significantly better.

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> If we invent LOG_ONLY (feel free to bikeshed the name), we could later >>> redefine it as (LOG |

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

Hi 2016-03-29 0:26 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane : > Pavel Stehule writes: > > [ copy-raw-format-20160227-03.patch ] > > I looked at this patch. I'm having a hard time accepting that it has > a use-case large enough to justify it, and here's the reason: it's >

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

Pavel Stehule writes: > I tested COPY RAW on old psql clients - and it is working without any > problem - so when the client uses same logic as psql, then it should to > work. Sure, there can be differently implemented clients, but the COPY > client side is usually simple

Re: [HACKERS] Some messages of pg_rewind --debug not getting translated

Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 2:45 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > If you're interesting in improving translatability of this program > > further, I suggest that messages of this sort > > msgid "BKPBLOCK_HAS_DATA set, but no data included at %X/%X"

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

On 2016-03-29 12:28:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > David Steele wrote: > >> On 3/29/16 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> Repurposing COMMERROR is definitely starting to seem like a low-impact > >>> solution compared to these others. Under what

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Access method extendability

On 29/03/16 18:25, Alvaro Herrera wrote: + /*- >+ * API for construction of generic xlog records >+ * >+ * This API allows user to construct generic xlog records which describe >+ * difference between pages in a generic

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

On 2016-03-29 12:58:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Looking back at the earlier thread Andres mentioned, I see that he was > specifically on about being able to do ereport(ERROR | LOG_NO_CLIENT), > which I've got a problem with because of the point about not breaking > wire-protocol expectations.

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Access method extendability

Does that mean this patch should be closed or is there more remaining to commit? Petr promises to check english in comments/docs in generic-wal patch at this week, bloom patch depends on it. Bloom patch is ready from my point of view. -- Teodor Sigaev

Re: [HACKERS] VS 2015 support in src/tools/msvc

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > I have machine ready, waiting for animal name and secret. Great! > It will obviously > fail until we push the 0002 and 0004 though. I think it would be a shame if we shipped 9.6 without MSVC 2015 support, but it'd be

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Improve safety of FormatMessage() calls on Windows

Christian Ullrich writes: > There are some instances of calls to FormatMessage() with the > FORMAT_MESSAGE_FROM_SYSTEM flag that omit the > FORMAT_MESSAGE_IGNORE_INSERTS flag. The effect of that is that if the > requested message string contains any insertion markers, the

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Access method extendability

On 29/03/16 17:33, Teodor Sigaev wrote: Does that mean this patch should be closed or is there more remaining to commit? Petr promises to check english in comments/docs in generic-wal patch at this week, bloom patch depends on it. Bloom patch is ready from my point of view. And here it is.

Re: [HACKERS] Updated backup APIs for non-exclusive backups

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 4:36 PM, David Steele wrote: > On 3/22/16 12:31 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:27 PM, David Steele > > wrote: >> > > > >> > Adding the stop time column should be a simple

Re: [HACKERS] VS 2015 support in src/tools/msvc

On 29/03/16 03:06, Robert Haas wrote: On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: OK, sounds good. Just a side-note. Andres has pushed the fix for the GinIs* macros as

Re: [HACKERS] extend pgbench expressions with functions

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> > On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 5:01 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: >> >>

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Access method extendability

Petr Jelinek wrote: > And here it is. It's not perfect but it's better (I am not native speaker > either). It's same as v12, just changed comments somewhat. I think this can still be improved a bit more, in particular this large comment, which I edit inline for expediency. > +

Re: [HACKERS] Add schema-qualified relnames in constraint error messages.

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Shulgin, Oleksandr < oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 7:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> "Shulgin, Oleksandr" writes: >> > What I dislike about this POC is all the disruption in libpq, to

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: "Causal reads" mode for load balancing reads without stale data

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 3:17 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > OK, so I am switching this patch as "Ready for committer", for 0001. > It is in better shape now. Well... I have a few questions yet. The new argument to SyncRepWaitForLSN is called "bool commit", but

Re: [HACKERS] unexpected result from to_tsvector

On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > "Shulgin, Oleksandr" writes: > > On Mar 20, 2016 01:09, "Dmitrii Golub" wrote: > >> Alex, actually subdomain can start with digit, > > > Not according to the RFC you

Re: [HACKERS] BUG #13854: SSPI authentication failure: wrong realm name used

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 5:09 PM, David Steele wrote: > On 3/24/16 5:22 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > >> Christian Ullrich wrote: >> >> To be honest, I'm not sure what can and cannot be done in auth code. I >>> took inspiration from the existing SSPI code and nearly every error

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

Robert Haas writes: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> If we invent LOG_ONLY (feel free to bikeshed the name), we could later >> redefine it as (LOG | ERR_HIDE_FROM_CLIENT), if we ever upgrade the >> underlying implementation to

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

Andres Freund writes: > On 2016-03-29 12:28:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> My proposal would be to invent a new elevel macro, maybe LOG_ONLY, >> for this purpose. But under the hood it'd be the same as COMMERROR. > A couple years back I proposed making thinks like COMERROR

Re: [HACKERS] Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

On 2016-03-29 14:09:42 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > There's actually lbarx/stbcx - but it's not present in all ISAs. So I > > guess it's clear where to go. > > Hm. We could certainly add a configure test to see if the local assembler > knows these

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench stats per script & other stuff

Fabien COELHO wrote: > > Hello, > > >>In doing this, I noticed that the latency output is wrong if you use -T > >>instead of -t; it always says the latency is zero because "duration" is > >>zero. I suppose it should be like in the attached instead. > > Indeed, I clearly overlooked option -t

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

On 03/28/2016 11:18 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: Anyway this is certainly not committable as-is, so I'm setting it back to Waiting on Author. But the fact that both libpq and ecpg would need updates makes me question whether we can safely pretend that

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Queries and PostGIS

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Paul Ramsey wrote: >> On the join case, I wonder if it's possible that _st_intersects is not >> marked parallel-safe? If that's not the problem, I don't have a >> second guess, but the thing to do would be to figure out whether >>

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Access method extendability

On 29/03/16 19:29, Teodor Sigaev wrote: I incorporated your changes and did some additional refinements on top of them still. Attached is delta against v12, that should cause less issues when merging for Teodor. But last version is 13th? No, 12 is last version from Alexander afaics, I named

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: index-only scans with partial indexes

I tried to whip this into shape, but there were a few areas I didn't feel I had the necessary understanding to feel comfortable taking on the committer role for it. I've cleaned it up the best I could, fixing whitespace and typos, eliminating an unnecessary addition of an include, improving C

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

Hi 2016-03-29 18:19 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane : > Pavel Stehule writes: > > I tested COPY RAW on old psql clients - and it is working without any > > problem - so when the client uses same logic as psql, then it should to > > work. Sure, there can be

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Queries and PostGIS

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Paul Ramsey wrote: > Parallel join would be a huge win, so some help/pointers on figuring > out why it's not coming into play when our gist operators are in > effect would be helpful. Robert, do you have any pointers on what I should

Re: [HACKERS] Using quicksort for every external sort run

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > One test that kind of bothers me in particular is the "SELECT DISTINCT > a FROM numeric_test ORDER BY a" test on the high_cardinality_random > data set. That's a wash at most work_mem values, but at 32MB it's > more

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Queries and PostGIS

> First, I beg to differ with this statement: "Some of the execution > results output are wrong! " The point is that > line has loops=4, so as in any other case where loops>1, you're seeing > the number of rows divided by the number of loops. It is the > *average* number of rows that were

Re: [HACKERS] Sequence Access Method WIP

On 29/03/16 19:46, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrotez > > Hmm I am unable to reproduce this. What OS? Any special configure flags you use? > In my environment the error remains with your last patches. I didn't use any special. ./configure --prefix=/home/fabrizio/pgsql --enable-cassert

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

Andrew Dunstan writes: > The I would suggest we try to invent something for psql which does help > with it. I just don't see this as an SQL problem. There's certainly a lot to be said for that approach. I'm still not convinced that we can make COPY do this without creating

Re: [HACKERS] Alter or rename enum value

On 03/27/2016 10:20 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: The more I think about this the more I bump up against the fact that almost anything we do might want to do to ameliorate the situation is going to be rolled back. The only approach I can think of that

Re: [HACKERS] BUG #13854: SSPI authentication failure: wrong realm name used

* Magnus Hagander wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 5:09 PM, David Steele wrote: It seems like this patch should be set "ready for committer". Can one of the reviewers do that if appropriate? I'll pick it up to do that as well as committing it. Ah, good news! I hope

[HACKERS] standby_schedule

I think we're at a point where we can translate the tests in src/test/regress/standby_schedule file into a PostgresNode-based test, or remove it (probably under src/test/recovery). That way, it would get run all the time rather than just when somebody feels like it (which is probably almost

Re: [BUGS] Re: [HACKERS] BUG #13854: SSPI authentication failure: wrong realm name used

Alvaro Herrera writes: > So, it seems that ClientAuthentication() expects to raise ereport(FATAL) > in case of authentication failures. But what's the code path that > causes that to happen if a ereport(ERROR) happens in there? Because all > that code is pretty careful

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Queries and PostGIS

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Paul Ramsey > wrote: >>> I have no idea why the cost adjustments that you need are different >>> for the scan case and the aggregate case. That does seem

Re: [HACKERS] incorrect docs for pgbench / skipped transactions

Please split the patch into one part for backporting and one part for master-only and post both patches, clearly indicating which is which. Attached are the full patch for head and the backport part (the patch name ends with "backport") separated. That's not really what I wanted; the full

Re: [BUGS] Re: [HACKERS] BUG #13854: SSPI authentication failure: wrong realm name used

So, it seems that ClientAuthentication() expects to raise ereport(FATAL) in case of authentication failures. But what's the code path that causes that to happen if a ereport(ERROR) happens in there? Because all that code is pretty careful to not do ereport(ERROR) directly and instead return

Re: [BUGS] Re: [HACKERS] BUG #13854: SSPI authentication failure: wrong realm name used

Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > So, it seems that ClientAuthentication() expects to raise ereport(FATAL) > > in case of authentication failures. But what's the code path that > > causes that to happen if a ereport(ERROR) happens in there? Because all > >

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Remove TZ entry from postgres CLI doc page.

Matthew Somerville writes: > Please find attached a patch to the postgres command line > documentation page doc/src/sgml/ref/postgres-ref.sgml that removes the > "TZ" entry from the "Environment" section. If I've understood it > correctly, since ca4af308 TZ can be looked at

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench stats per script & other stuff

Indeed. The documentation is manually edited when submitting changes so as to minimize diffs, but then it does not correspond anymore to any actual output, so it is easy to do it wrong. Well, you fixed the "latency stddev" line to the sample output too, but in my trial run that line was not

Re: [HACKERS] Sequence Access Method WIP

On 29/03/16 22:08, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: > > On 29/03/16 19:46, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrotez >> >> >> > >> > Hmm I am unable to reproduce this. What OS? Any special

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Supporting +-Infinity values by to_timestamp(float8)

Anastasia Lubennikova writes: > 17.03.2016 06:27, Vitaly Burovoy: >> Please find attached a new version of the patch. > I think, I should write something as a reviewer. > I read the patch again and I don't see any issues with it. > It applies to the master and works

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: "Causal reads" mode for load balancing reads without stale data

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 3:17 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> OK, so I am switching this patch as "Ready for committer", for 0001. >> It is in better shape now. > > Well... I have a few

[HACKERS] [PATCH] Remove TZ entry from postgres CLI doc page.

Hi, Please find attached a patch to the postgres command line documentation page doc/src/sgml/ref/postgres-ref.sgml that removes the "TZ" entry from the "Environment" section. If I've understood it correctly, since ca4af308 TZ can be looked at when you run initdb, but is not looked at when the

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v8] GSSAPI encryption support

David Steele writes: > On 3/20/16 12:09 AM, Robbie Harwood wrote: > >> A new version of my GSSAPI encryption patchset is available > > Here's a more thorough review: Thanks for the review! To keep this a manageable size, I'm going to trim pretty heavily. If I haven't

[HACKERS] Pg-Logical output pkg; can't install 9.4 and 9.5 on same Wheezy box

Hackers, please see below. Posted on Admin and then General but not sure anyone of authority has noticed. Briefly, conflicting files in an include directory prevent 9.4/9.5 installed on same host instance. Thanks - Posted to Admin a few days ago... I'll try here next before going to

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Access method extendability

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Teodor Sigaev wrote: > I incorporated your changes and did some additional refinements on top of >> them >> still. >> >> Attached is delta against v12, that should cause less issues when merging >> for >> Teodor. >> > > But last version is 13th?

Re: [HACKERS] Sequence Access Method WIP

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > > On 29/03/16 18:50, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:25 PM, David Steele > > wrote: >> > >> > Hi Petr, >> > >> > On 3/28/16 3:11

Re: [HACKERS] Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

On 2016-03-29 20:22:00 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > > + while (true) > > > { > > > - if (buf->usage_count == 0) > > > - buf->usage_count = 1; > > > + /* spin-wait till lock is free */ > > > +

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench stats per script & other stuff

Alvaro Herrera wrote: > In doing this, I noticed that the latency output is wrong if you use -T > instead of -t; it always says the latency is zero because "duration" is > zero. I suppose it should be like in the attached instead. At the same > time, it says "latency average: XYZ" instead of

Re: [HACKERS] Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

Andres Freund writes: > Dilip, could you test performance of reducing ppc's spinlock to 1 byte? > Cross-compiling suggest that doing so "just works". I.e. replace the > #if defined(__ppc__) typedef from an int to a char. AFAICS, lwarx/stwcx are specifically *word* wide.

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench - show weight percent

Fabien wrote: > > This minor patch shows the expected drawing percent in multi-script reports, > next to the relative weight. Applied together with the zero weight. -- Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training &

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench stats per script & other stuff

Fabien COELHO wrote: > > >- that it does work:-) I'm not sure what happens by the script selection > > process, it should be checked carefully because it was not designed > > with allowing a zero weight, and it may depend on its/their positions. > > It may already work, but it really needs

Re: [HACKERS] Reworks of CustomScan serialization/deserialization

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 11:00 PM, Kouhei Kaigai wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org >> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Robert Haas >> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 10:54 AM >> To: Kaigai Kouhei(海外 浩平) >>

Re: [HACKERS] Updated backup APIs for non-exclusive backups

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 4:36 PM, David Steele wrote: > >> On 3/22/16 12:31 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:27 PM, David Steele >>

Re: [HACKERS] Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

Andres Freund writes: > On 2016-03-29 13:24:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> AFAICS, lwarx/stwcx are specifically *word* wide. > There's actually lbarx/stbcx - but it's not present in all ISAs. So I > guess it's clear where to go. Hm. We could certainly add a configure test to

Re: [HACKERS] incorrect docs for pgbench / skipped transactions

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote: >>> Ok, I added a reference to the commitfest entry from this wiki page, and >>> a >>> note about partial 9.5 backporting. >> >> Please split the patch into one part for backporting and one part for >> master-only and post

Re: [HACKERS] Relation extension scalability

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > Attaching new version v18 - Some cleanup work on v17. - Improved *UpdateFreeSpaceMap *function. - Performance and space utilization are same as V17 -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB:

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Access method extendability

I incorporated your changes and did some additional refinements on top of them still. Attached is delta against v12, that should cause less issues when merging for Teodor. But last version is 13th? BTW, it would be cool to add odcs in VII. Internals chapter, description should be similar to

Re: [HACKERS] Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

On 2016-03-29 13:24:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > Dilip, could you test performance of reducing ppc's spinlock to 1 byte? > > Cross-compiling suggest that doing so "just works". I.e. replace the > > #if defined(__ppc__) typedef from an int to a char. >

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

Pavel Stehule writes: > I am writing few lines as summary: > 1. invention RAW_TEXT and RAW_BINARY > 2. for RAW_BINARY: PQbinaryTuples() returns 1 and PQfformat() returns 1 > 3.a for RAW_TEXT: PQbinaryTuples() returns 0 and PQfformat() returns 0, but > the client should

Re: [HACKERS] standby_schedule

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:44 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I think we're at a point where we can translate the tests in > src/test/regress/standby_schedule file into a PostgresNode-based test, > or remove it (probably under src/test/recovery). That way, it would get > run

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v8] GSSAPI encryption support

On 3/29/16 5:05 PM, Robbie Harwood wrote: > David Steele writes: > >> On 3/20/16 12:09 AM, Robbie Harwood wrote: >> >>> A new version of my GSSAPI encryption patchset is available >> >> Here's a more thorough review: > > Thanks for the review! To keep this a manageable

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Sync tzload() and tzparse() APIs with IANA release tzcode2016c.

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Christian Ullrich writes: >> * Tom Lane wrote: >>> But then, should not this code make sure that errno *always* gets set? > >> A library function that does not fail does not touch errno. > > Right, I

Re: [HACKERS] OOM in libpq and infinite loop with getCopyStart()

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 12:01 AM, David Steele wrote: > Hi Amit, > > On 3/22/16 3:37 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> Hope this brings some light in. > > > Do you know when you'll have time to respond to Michael's last email? I've > marked this patch "waiting on author" in the

Re: [HACKERS] OOM in libpq and infinite loop with getCopyStart()

On 3/29/16 8:21 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 12:01 AM, David Steele wrote: >> Hi Amit, >> >> On 3/22/16 3:37 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> >>> Hope this brings some light in. >> >> >> Do you know when you'll have time to respond to Michael's last

[HACKERS] Please correct/improve wiki page about abbreviated keys bug

Hackers, For Thursday's release, I've added a wiki page to give users more information about the strxfrm() issue, especially since we're going to ask them to do a bunch of REINDEXing. Please help me improve this. Particularly, I need help on the following: * is my explanation of the issue

[HACKERS] kqueue

Hi, On the WaitEventSet thread I posted a small patch to add kqueue support[1]. Since then I peeked at how some other software[2] interacts with kqueue and discovered that there are platforms including NetBSD where kevent.udata is an intptr_t instead of a void *. Here's a version which should

[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow to_timestamp(float8) to convert float infinity to timestam

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Allow to_timestamp(float8) to convert float infinity to timestamp infinity. > > With the original SQL-function implementation, such cases failed because > we don't support infinite intervals. Converting the function to C lets

Re: [HACKERS] IF (NOT) EXISTS in psql-completion

Thank you Pavel, David. Thank you for pointing syntaxes to be addressed. Most of the are addressed in the attached patch. At Tue, 22 Mar 2016 12:57:27 -0400, David Steele wrote in <56f17977.8040...@pgmasters.net> > Hi Kyotaro, > > On 3/18/16 3:22 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] pglogical_output - a general purpose logical decoding output plugin

On 15 March 2016 at 04:48, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-01-31 05:09:33 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote: > > On 29 January 2016 at 18:16, Andres Freund wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > so, I'm reviewing the output of: > > > > > > > Thankyou very much for the

Re: [HACKERS] IF (NOT) EXISTS in psql-completion

Hi 2016-03-29 8:43 GMT+02:00 Kyotaro HORIGUCHI : > Thank you Pavel, David. > > Thank you for pointing syntaxes to be addressed. Most of the are > addressed in the attached patch. > > > At Tue, 22 Mar 2016 12:57:27 -0400, David Steele >

  1   2   >