Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Don't generate parallel paths for rels with parallel-restricted

2016-06-11 Thread Amit Kapila
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Andreas Seltenreich wrote: > > Amit Kapila writes: > > > I have moved it to CLOSE_WAIT state because we have derived our > > queries to reproduce the problem based on original report[1]. If next > > run of sqlsmith doesn't show any problem in

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Don't generate parallel paths for rels with parallel-restricted

2016-06-11 Thread Andreas Seltenreich
Amit Kapila writes: > I have moved it to CLOSE_WAIT state because we have derived our > queries to reproduce the problem based on original report[1]. If next > run of sqlsmith doesn't show any problem in this context then we will > move it to resolved. I don't have access to my testing horse

Re: [HACKERS] Rename max_parallel_degree?

2016-06-11 Thread Julien Rouhaud
On 09/06/2016 16:04, Robert Haas wrote: > > OK, I pushed this after re-reviewing it and fixing a number of > oversights. There remains only the task of adding max_parallel_degree > as a system-wide limit (as opposed to max_parallel_degree now > max_parallel_workers_per_gather which is a

Re: [HACKERS] Reviewing freeze map code

2016-06-11 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> 3. vacuumlazy.c includes this code: >> >> if (heap_prepare_freeze_tuple(tuple.t_data, FreezeLimit, >> MultiXactCutoff, [nfrozen])) >>

Re: [HACKERS] Rename max_parallel_degree?

2016-06-11 Thread Julien Rouhaud
On 11/06/2016 23:37, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > On 09/06/2016 16:04, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> OK, I pushed this after re-reviewing it and fixing a number of >> oversights. There remains only the task of adding max_parallel_degree >> as a system-wide limit (as opposed to max_parallel_degree now >>

Re: [HACKERS] Confusing recovery message when target not hit

2016-06-11 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Thom Brown wrote: > It may be the wrong way of going about it, but you get the idea of what I'm > suggesting we output instead. Surely things could be better. So +1 to be more verbose here. +if (recoveryStopTime == 0) +

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold

2016-06-11 Thread Kevin Grittner
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >>> On 2016-05-24 11:24:44 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote: On

Re: [HACKERS] Confusing recovery message when target not hit

2016-06-11 Thread David Steele
On 6/11/16 8:22 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Thom Brown wrote: >> It may be the wrong way of going about it, but you get the idea of what I'm >> suggesting we output instead. > > Surely things could be better. So +1 to be more verbose here. > > +