Re: [HACKERS] Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW

On 2016/04/08 13:42, Noah Misch wrote: On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 03:22:03PM +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote: On 2016/04/04 20:35, Michael Paquier wrote: On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: Here is a patch to fix this issue. As proposed by Michael, I modified execute_dml_stmt so tha

Re: [HACKERS] Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-04-07 18:40:14 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > This is the data with -b tpcb-like@1 with 20-min run for each version > and I > > could see almost similar results as the data posted in previous e-mail. > > > > Client Count/Patch_ver (t

Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Michael Paquier >>> wrote: Here are few things I have noticed: + for (i = 0;

Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Michael Paquier >>> wrote: On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: pg_restore parallel-execution-deadlock issue

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Armin Schöffmann wrote: > I propose the below patches to parallels.c and pg_backup_utils.c fixing > deadlocks in pg_restore (windows only) if running more than 2 parallel jobs. > This problem was reported by me earlier this year. > http://www.postgresql.org/message

[HACKERS] Lower msvc build verbosity level

Hello, could we perhaps lower the verbosity level of the msvc build (in src/tools/msvc/build.pl) from "detailed" to "normal"? In my experiment, this reduces the size of the build log by 96.4 percent (from 12.5 MiB to 438 KiB), or if the log is not redirected, it shortens the build time by 45

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql

Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I messed with that code some more, as it looked unnecessarily > complicated; please see attached and verify that it still behaves > sanely. This needs those regression tests you promised. I tested a few > cases and it seems good to me. I've fixed a couple things

Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > So if we go by this each time backend calls pg_stat_get_wal_senders, it > > needs to do parsing to form SyncRepConfig whether it's changed or not from > > previous time. I understand

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

* Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Andrew Dunstan > wrote: Not out of the woods yet. Attached is what I got from VS2015 on a fresh W10 VM, with Michael's patch 0002 and 0004 applied. Interesting, I have no idea what we are doing differently, and seeing those errors

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql

Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I wonder if the business of appending values of multiple columns > separated with spaces is doing us any good. Why not require that > there's a single column in the cell? If the user wants to put things > together, they can use format() or just || the fields toget

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

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:24 PM, Christian Ullrich wrote: > * 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 d

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

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: Personally, I like documenting assertions, and will sometimes write assertions that the compiler could easily optimize away. Maybe going *that* far is more a matter of personal style, but I think an assertion about the new index tuple size b

Re: [HACKERS] Lower msvc build verbosity level

On 04/08/2016 06:19 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: Hello, could we perhaps lower the verbosity level of the msvc build (in src/tools/msvc/build.pl) from "detailed" to "normal"? In my experiment, this reduces the size of the build log by 96.4 percent (from 12.5 MiB to 438 KiB), or if the log i

Re: [HACKERS] Lower msvc build verbosity level

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > On 04/08/2016 06:19 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> could we perhaps lower the verbosity level of the msvc build (in >> src/tools/msvc/build.pl) from "detailed" to "normal"? In my experiment, >> this reduces the size of th

[HACKERS] Small patch for snapmgr.c

Hello Currently there is a following piece of code in snapmgr.c: ``` /* Copy all required fields */ snapshot = (Snapshot) MemoryContextAlloc(TopTransactionContext, size); snapshot->satisfies = HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC; snapshot->xmin = serialized_snapshot->xmin; snapshot->xmax = serialized_snapshot

Re: [HACKERS] Lower msvc build verbosity level

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> On 04/08/2016 06:19 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: >>> could we perhaps lower the verbosity level of the msvc build (in >>> src/tools/msvc/build.pl) from "detailed" to "normal"? In my e

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

08.04.2016 15:06, Teodor Sigaev: On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: Personally, I like documenting assertions, and will sometimes write assertions that the compiler could easily optimize away. Maybe going *that* far is more a matter of personal style, but I think an assertio

Re: [HACKERS] Speedup twophase transactions

On 04/07/2016 02:29 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: So recovery is conflicting here. My guess is that this patch is missing some lock cleanup. With the test case attached in my case the COMMIT PREPARED record does not even get replayed. Should we create an entry for the open item list [0] for this

Re: [HACKERS] Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 3:05 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: >> What do you think? This open item's seven-day deadline has passed. It >> would >> help keep things moving to know whether you consider your latest patch >> optimal >> or whether you wish to change it the way Michael described. > > I wish to

Re: [HACKERS] amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking tool)

29.03.2016 06:13, Peter Geoghegan: On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: That's right - I have a small number of feedback items to work through. I also determined myself that there could be a very low probability race condition when checking the key space across sibling pages

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

On 04/08/2016 07:15 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: * Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Andrew Dunstan > wrote: Not out of the woods yet. Attached is what I got from VS2015 on a fresh W10 VM, with Michael's patch 0002 and 0004 applied. Interesting, I have no idea wh

Re: [HACKERS] Speedup twophase transactions

> On 07 Apr 2016, at 09:29, Michael Paquier wrote: > > relOid=16385) + 358 at standby.c:627 >frame #11: 0x0001023dac6b > postgres`standby_redo(record=0x7fde50841e38) + 251 at > standby.c:809 > > (LOCALLOCK) $1 = { > tag = { >lock = { > locktag_field1 = 16384 > locktag_

Re: [HACKERS] Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 6:28 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 3:05 AM, Etsuro Fujita > wrote: > >> What do you think? This open item's seven-day deadline has passed. It > >> would > >> help keep things moving to know whether you consider your latest patch > >> optimal > >> or whe

Re: [HACKERS] Speedup twophase transactions

On 7 April 2016 at 07:29, Michael Paquier wrote: With the test case attached in my case the COMMIT PREPARED record does > not even get replayed. > I was surprised to see this in the test... sleep 2; # wait for changes to arrive on slave I think the test framework needs a WaitForLSN function

Re: [HACKERS] Speedup twophase transactions

> On 08 Apr 2016, at 16:36, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On 7 April 2016 at 07:29, Michael Paquier wrote: > > With the test case attached in my case the COMMIT PREPARED record does > not even get replayed. > > I was surprised to see this in the test... > >sleep 2; # wait for changes to arrive o

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

Here's where we stand on the last day of the 2016-03 commitfest: Needs review: 7 (was 28 last week) Waiting on Author: 4 (was 16 last week) Ready for Committer: 12 Committed: 92 Moved to next CF: 3 Rejected: 7 Returned with Feedback: 23 So the commitfest is 84% complete with less than twelve ho

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

Andrew Dunstan writes: > OK, at this stage it appears to me that if today is the deadline for > getting this in for 9.6 then it's going to be missed. It would be unfortunate to go another year without support for that toolchain. My suggestion is that you continue to work away on the problem, an

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

David Steele writes: > So the commitfest is 84% complete with less than twelve hours to go. Have we set a particular time-of-day for closing the CF, and if so what is it exactly? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Steele writes: > > So the commitfest is 84% complete with less than twelve hours to go. > > Have we set a particular time-of-day for closing the CF, and if so > what is it exactly? > > And timezone? :) I think traditionally it's really bee

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] speeding up GIN build with parallel workers

Here is a new version of the patch, which: 1. Fixes some minor stylistic issues. 2. Uses binaryheap (instead of a custom ugly stack) for merging. Regards, Constantin S. Pan Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml b/doc

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

On 04/08/2016 09:52 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: OK, at this stage it appears to me that if today is the deadline for getting this in for 9.6 then it's going to be missed. It would be unfortunate to go another year without support for that toolchain. My suggestion is that you

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

On 4/8/16 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Steele writes: >> So the commitfest is 84% complete with less than twelve hours to go. > > Have we set a particular time-of-day for closing the CF, and if so > what is it exactly? From the referenced email: "Accordingly, the release management has dec

Re: [HACKERS] Lower msvc build verbosity level

Michael Paquier writes: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >>> could we perhaps lower the verbosity level of the msvc build (in >>> src/tools/msvc/build.pl) from "detailed" to "normal"? >> +1 for doing that. It seems

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

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:05 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: ¥> On 04/08/2016 07:15 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: >> GetLocaleInfoEx() is covered by #if (WINVER >= 0x0600), we define >> _WIN32_WINNT as 0x0501 (src/include/port/win32.h) and WINVER inherits that >> value. Yes, I had a look at winnls.h and

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

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:05 PM, Andrew Dunstan > wrote: > ¥> On 04/08/2016 07:15 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: > >> GetLocaleInfoEx() is covered by #if (WINVER >= 0x0600), we define > >> _WIN32_WINNT as 0x0501 (src/include/port/win32.h) an

[HACKERS] Execute ignoring cursor?

Hello. Didn't find dedicated plpgsql list, so decided to post question here. I am trying to create a  function that will pick up some values from cursor and execute them as a dynamic query. However, once i use EXECUTE, its seems to be ignoring the existence of cursor and try to pick up values fr

Re: [HACKERS] Execute ignoring cursor?

Hi 2016-04-08 16:17 GMT+02:00 nummervet nummervet : > Hello. Didn't find dedicated plpgsql list, so decided to post question > here. > I am trying to create a function that will pick up some values from > cursor and execute them as a dynamic query. > However, once i use EXECUTE, its seems to be

[HACKERS] skink vs. phrase full text search

Buildfarm member skink has been unhappy since bb14050 went in, but I find that I cannot reproduce any failure by valgrind'ing here. Can you suggest any secret sauce that that animal may be using? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@po

[HACKERS] Re[2]: [HACKERS] Execute ignoring cursor?

That didn't work for me: ERROR:  syntax error at or near "$" LINE 1: ...ibute_id, set_id ) (select $."151", '... >Пятница, 8 апреля 2016, 17:25 +03:00 от Pavel Stehule >: > >Hi > >2016-04-08 16:17 GMT+02:00 nummervet nummervet < nummer...@mail.ru > : >>Hello. Didn't find dedicated plpgsql li

Re: [HACKERS] pam auth - add rhost item

On 03/22/2016 04:29 PM, Grzegorz Sampolski wrote: New patch, which change pamservice parameter from pamusedns to pam_use_hostname. committed -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hac

Re: [HACKERS] skink vs. phrase full text search

Hi, On 2016-04-08 10:45:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Buildfarm member skink has been unhappy since bb14050 went in, > but I find that I cannot reproduce any failure by valgrind'ing > here. Can you suggest any secret sauce that that animal may > be using? I gather you're compiling with USE_VALGRIN

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:06 AM, David Steele wrote: > On 4/8/16 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> David Steele writes: >>> So the commitfest is 84% complete with less than twelve hours to go. >> >> Have we set a particular time-of-day for closing the CF, and if so >> what is it exactly? > > From the

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:06 AM, David Steele wrote: > > On 4/8/16 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> David Steele writes: > >>> So the commitfest is 84% complete with less than twelve hours to go. > >> > >> Have we set a particular time-of-day f

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

On 2016-04-08 10:56:28 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:06 AM, David Steele wrote: > > On 4/8/16 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> David Steele writes: > >>> So the commitfest is 84% complete with less than twelve hours to go. > >> > >> Have we set a particular time-of-day for c

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

* Michael Paquier wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:05 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: ¥> On 04/08/2016 07:15 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: Michael, none of your patches change this, so how does it ever build on your system? Luck. I am getting a warning but the code is able to somewhat compile:

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

08.04.2016 15:45, Anastasia Lubennikova: 08.04.2016 15:06, Teodor Sigaev: On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: Personally, I like documenting assertions, and will sometimes write assertions that the compiler could easily optimize away. Maybe going *that* far is more a matter

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: BSD Authentication support

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 6:48 AM, Pierre-Emmanuel André wrote: > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 06:30:35PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Marisa Emerson wrote: >> > On 18/03/16 03:57, Thomas Munro wrote: >> >> >> >> You used one name in the docs and another in the code: >>

Re: [HACKERS] Choosing parallel_degree

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > Other than that, patch looks good and I have marked it as Ready For > Committer. Hope, we get this for 9.6. Committed. I think this is likely to make parallel query significantly more usable in 9.6. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.e

Re: [HACKERS] Execute ignoring cursor?

2016-04-08 16:46 GMT+02:00 nummervet nummervet : > That didn't work for me: > > ERROR: syntax error at or near "$" > LINE 1: ...ibute_id, set_id ) (select $."151", '... > should be $1 Regards Pavel > > > Пятница, 8 апреля 2016, 17:25 +03:00 от Pavel Stehule < > pavel.steh...@gmail.com>: > >

Re: [HACKERS] Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers

On 2016-03-31 15:07:22 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > I think we should change comments on top of this function. I have changed > the comments as per my previous patch and attached the modified patch with > this mail, see if that makes sense. I've applied this patch. Regards, Andres -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers

On 2016-04-08 13:07:05 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > I think by now, we have done many tests with both approaches and we find > that in some cases, it is slightly better and in most cases it is neutral > and in some cases it is worse than group clog approach. I feel we should > go with group clog ap

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: PL/Pythonu - function ereport

Thank you very much thank you, pushed. Pls, pay attention to buildfarm. -- Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teo...@sigaev.ru WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.or

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] speeding up GIN build with parallel workers

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Constantin S. Pan wrote: > Here is a new version of the patch, which: > > 1. Fixes some minor stylistic issues. > > 2. Uses binaryheap (instead of a custom ugly stack) for merging. I think we need to push this patch out to 9.7. This code has had a little review h

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-04-08 10:56:28 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:06 AM, David Steele wrote: >> > On 4/8/16 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> >> David Steele writes: >> >>> So the commitfest is 84% complete with less than twelve hour

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: BSD Authentication support

On 4/8/16 11:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 6:48 AM, Pierre-Emmanuel André > wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 06:30:35PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Marisa Emerson wrote: On 18/03/16 03:57, Thomas Munro wrote: > > You used on

Re: [HACKERS] multivariate statistics v14

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:18 AM, David Steele wrote: > 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 mult

Re: [HACKERS] Combining Aggregates

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:28 PM, David Rowley wrote: >> Is that everything now? I don't see anything about combining aggs in the git >> log and this is still showing as UnCommitted in the CF app. > > There's just a documentation patch and two combine functions for > floating point aggs left now (Ha

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

On 8 April 2016 at 16:00, Andres Freund wrote: I've finished polishing the Pin/Unpin patch. But the final polishing > happened on an intercontential flight, after days spent preparing my > move to SF. I'd be glad if you would allow me to look over the patch > again, before pushing it sometime thi

Re: [HACKERS] Choosing parallel_degree

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 8:23 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> Other than that, patch looks good and I have marked it as Ready For >> Committer. Hope, we get this for 9.6. > > Committed. I think this is likely to make parallel query > significantly mo

Re: [HACKERS] Choosing parallel_degree

On 8 April 2016 at 17:00, Paul Ramsey wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 8:23 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Amit Kapila > wrote: > >> Other than that, patch looks good and I have marked it as Ready For > >> Committer. Hope, we get this for 9.6. > > > > Committed. I t

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

On 04/08/2016 11:02 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: * Michael Paquier wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:05 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: ¥> On 04/08/2016 07:15 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: Michael, none of your patches change this, so how does it ever build on your system? Luck. I am getting

Re: [HACKERS] Batch update of indexes

On 4/2/16 4:21 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote: > Thank you for review, Tom. > > I completely agree with all your arguments against this patch. > I have proposed this patch mostly as prove of concept. I have marked this "returned with feedback". Hopefully you can work on the concept and resubmit

Re: [HACKERS] Lower msvc build verbosity level

* Tom Lane wrote: +several. Grepping for compiler warnings, for example, is really painful right now on any MSVC critter. I've resorted to grepping for "warning C", which skips the noise messages, but I'm never sure if I'm missing something. You miss all diagnostics from other tools than the

Re: [HACKERS] Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:00 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2016-03-31 15:07:22 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > I think we should change comments on top of this function. I have changed > > the comments as per my previous patch and attached the modified patch with > > this mail, see if that makes s

Re: [HACKERS] Choosing parallel_degree

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 8 April 2016 at 17:00, Paul Ramsey wrote: >> >> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 8:23 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Amit Kapila >> > wrote: >> >> Other than that, patch looks good and I have marked it as Ready For >> >>

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: BSD Authentication support

David Steele writes: > On 4/8/16 11:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> Should we commit this patch? > To summarize: > Robert Haas and Peter Eisentraut have done code-only reviews. Thomas > Munro has reviewed and tested with a caveat that he is no BSD expert. > Pierre-Emmanuel tested but did not do a

Re: [HACKERS] Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

On 2016-04-07 16:50:44 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > > On 2016-03-31 20:21:02 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > > ! BEGIN_BUFSTATE_CAS_LOOP(bufHdr); > > > > > > ! Assert(BUF_STATE_GET_REFCOUNT(state) > 0); > > > ! wasDirt

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

On 09/04/16 02:58, Magnus Hagander wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Robert Haas > wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:06 AM, David Steele mailto:da...@pgmasters.net>> wrote: > On 4/8/16 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> David Steele mailto:da...@pgmasters.

Re: [HACKERS] Lower msvc build verbosity level

On 04/08/2016 12:24 PM, Christian Ullrich wrote: * Tom Lane wrote: +several. Grepping for compiler warnings, for example, is really painful right now on any MSVC critter. I've resorted to grepping for "warning C", which skips the noise messages, but I'm never sure if I'm missing something

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

* Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 04/08/2016 11:02 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: src/port/chklocale.c(233): warning C4133: 'function': incompatible types - from 'const char *' to 'LPCWSTR' [...\postgres.vcxproj] Do you have a fix for the LPCWSTR parameter issue? As long as the locale short n

Re: [HACKERS] Choosing parallel_degree

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Paul Ramsey wrote: > Insofar as the patch is throttling how many parallel workers you get > based solely on your relsize, it does concern this patch, but it's a > general issue in both the extreme and not obviously related costings > needed to trip parallel sequenc

Re: [HACKERS] Combining Aggregates

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:28 PM, David Rowley > wrote: >>> Is that everything now? I don't see anything about combining aggs in the git >>> log and this is still showing as UnCommitted in the CF app. >> >> There's just a documentation patch and

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: BSD Authentication support

Marisa Emerson writes: > Woops, fix attached. Pushed with minor adjustments. 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

Re: [HACKERS] Fix for OpenSSL error queue bug

On 04/07/2016 09:36 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I wish we could avoid the huge, repeated comment blocks. Perhaps we could put them at the top of the files once? I'm fine with that. Do you want to take care of that, or should I? I have

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:45 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > here is cleaned/finished previous implementation of RAW_TEXT/RAW_BINARY > formats for COPY statements. > > The RAW with text formats means unescaped data, but with correct encoding - > input/output is realised with input/output function. RAW b

Re: [HACKERS] Fix for OpenSSL error queue bug

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I have committed this so that the comments are only in the first instance in > each file. I think that should give enough information to someone who is > curious about the details of the error handling. > > Also, I have adjusted this so t

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

2016-04-08 20:13 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas : > On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:45 AM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: > > here is cleaned/finished previous implementation of RAW_TEXT/RAW_BINARY > > formats for COPY statements. > > > > The RAW with text formats means unescaped data, but with correct > encoding - > >

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v12] GSSAPI encryption support

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Robbie Harwood writes: >>> Tom Lane writes: Wait a second. So the initial connection-request packet is necessarily unencrypted under this scheme? >> >>> Yes, by necessity. Th

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

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Thank you for looking this and for the comment. > > Since the end of this CF is quite soon and this seems in > uncommittable state, feel free to move this to the next CF if any > other patch with more priority. Moved. It's appropriate to

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] pg_restore casts check constraints differently

Hey, I work with Josh Ma and we were troubleshooting this problem together. We ended up creating a workaround by taking the dumps from different DBs, initializing new DBs based on those dumps, and then dumping these new DBs. This work around worked since the dumps of databases that were initialize

Re: [HACKERS] Show dropped users' backends in pg_stat_activity

24.03.2016, 18:03, Tom Lane kirjoitti: Robert Haas writes: I am not really in favor of half-fixing this. If we can't conveniently wait until a dropped role is completely out of the system, then I don't see a lot of point in trying to do it in the limited cases where we can. If LEFT JOIN is th

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: BSD Authentication support

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 06:30:35PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Marisa Emerson wrote: > > On 18/03/16 03:57, Thomas Munro wrote: > >> > >> You used one name in the docs and another in the code: > >> > >> +BSD Authentication on PostgreSQL uses the > >> auth-pos

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

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:24 PM, Christian Ullrich > wrote: > >> * 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

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Detecting SSI conflicts before reporting constraint violations

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Thomas Munro > wrote: > >> Here is a version that includes an attempt to describe the >> situation in the documentation. > > Pushed with minor adjustments to the docs. Mostly I thought your > new text was mo

Re: [HACKERS] Fix for OpenSSL error queue bug

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > That seems reasonable. I'm glad we finally got this done. Thanks. Are we going to backpatch this? -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://w

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v12] GSSAPI encryption support

* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Robbie Harwood writes: > >>> Tom Lane writes: > Wait a second. So the initial connection-request packet is necessarily > u

Re: [HACKERS] Speedup twophase transactions

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Jesper Pedersen wrote: > On 04/07/2016 02:29 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> So recovery is conflicting here. My guess is that this patch is >> missing some lock cleanup. >> >> With the test case attached in my case the COMMIT PREPARED record does >> not even get repl

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: PL/Pythonu - function ereport

2016-04-08 17:38 GMT+02:00 Teodor Sigaev : > Thank you very much >> > > thank you, pushed. Pls, pay attention to buildfarm. > Thank you very much for commit. And big thanks to Iacob for big help. Regards Pavel > > -- > Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teo...@sigaev.ru

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v12] GSSAPI encryption support

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > While it seems like this particular patch (with myself as committer) > would meet the requirements stated by the RMT for an extension, having > considered it over the past day or so, I don't think we should make it a > policy to allow an exten

Re: [HACKERS] Speedup twophase transactions

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 7:43 AM, Stas Kelvich wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for reviews and commit! I apologize for being clueless here, but was this patch committed? It's still marked as "Needs Review" in the CommitFest application. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterp

Re: [HACKERS] Fix for OpenSSL error queue bug

Peter Geoghegan writes: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> That seems reasonable. I'm glad we finally got this done. Thanks. > Are we going to backpatch this? Seems like a reasonable thing to do, but somebody would have to do the legwork to produce back-branch patches.

Re: [HACKERS] Fix for OpenSSL error queue bug

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Seems like a reasonable thing to do, but somebody would have to do the > legwork to produce back-branch patches. I'll do so soon. I was waiting on Peter E to take me up on the offer. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] Show dropped users' backends in pg_stat_activity

Oskari Saarenmaa writes: > 24.03.2016, 18:03, Tom Lane kirjoitti: >> I concur. Let's put the left join(s) into those views and call it >> good. > Added my patch to the 2016-09 commitfest > (https://commitfest.postgresql.org/10/601/) as a bug fix as I thought > not showing all backends in pg_st

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: PL/Pythonu - function ereport

Pavel Stehule writes: > 2016-04-08 17:38 GMT+02:00 Teodor Sigaev : >> thank you, pushed. Pls, pay attention to buildfarm. > Thank you very much for commit. According to buildfarm member prairiedog, there's a problem in one of the test cases. I suspect that it's using syntax that doesn't exist i

Re: [HACKERS] multivariate statistics v14

On 04/08/2016 05:55 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:18 AM, David Steele wrote: 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

Re: [HACKERS] Speedup twophase transactions

On 04/08/2016 02:42 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 7:43 AM, Stas Kelvich wrote: Hi, Thanks for reviews and commit! I apologize for being clueless here, but was this patch committed? It's still marked as "Needs Review" in the CommitFest application. There are 2 parts to thi

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: PL/Pythonu - function ereport

2016-04-08 20:52 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane : > Pavel Stehule writes: > > 2016-04-08 17:38 GMT+02:00 Teodor Sigaev : > >> thank you, pushed. Pls, pay attention to buildfarm. > > > Thank you very much for commit. > > According to buildfarm member prairiedog, there's a problem in one > of the test cases.

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

On 04/08/2016 02:13 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:45 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: here is cleaned/finished previous implementation of RAW_TEXT/RAW_BINARY formats for COPY statements. The RAW with text formats means unescaped data, but with correct encoding - input/output is rea

Re: [HACKERS] Speedup twophase transactions

On 04/08/2016 02:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Jesper Pedersen wrote: On 04/07/2016 02:29 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: So recovery is conflicting here. My guess is that this patch is missing some lock cleanup. With the test case attached in my case the COMMIT PREPARE

Re: [HACKERS] Speedup twophase transactions

> On 08 Apr 2016, at 21:42, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 7:43 AM, Stas Kelvich > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Thanks for reviews and commit! > > I apologize for being clueless here, but was this patch committed? > It's still marked as "Needs Review" in the CommitFest application. T

  1   2   >