On July 19, 2016 7:43:05 PM PDT, Amit Kapila wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Andres Freund
>wrote:
>>
>>
>> On July 19, 2016 7:14:42 PM PDT, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
>>>On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:02 AM, Andres Freund
>>>wrote:
On 2016-07-19 18:09:59 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>
At PgCon we discussed that Petr Jelinek would be working on the code for an
in-core logical replication implementation, while I would work on user
interface/security models. Petr has been actively working on the code and
will post patch in a few weeks, as discussed and agreed. Craig Ringer is
also
Hi Gabe,
Did you get Aggregate Pushdown FDW plugin?
Would be really helpful if you can share some insight on your investigation.
Regards
Anant
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.nabble.com/FDW-handling-count-through-AnalyzeForeignTable-or-other-constant-time-push-down-tp5889291
Iirc we changed the default to be SSL for localhost to address a particular
problem. It seemed surprising at the time but it was the most effective
solution.
On 19 Jul 2016 21:58, "Peter Eisentraut"
wrote:
> On 7/19/16 3:32 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > There are definitely cases where it's usef
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 7/19/16 3:32 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > There are definitely cases where it's useful. I'm only arguing for
> > changing the default.
>
> I don't understand why you want to change the default. Is
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Amit Kapila
>>> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Michael Paquier
w
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Michael Paquier
>>> wrote:
On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Amit Kapila
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Etsuro Fujita writes:
>>> Here is a patch for that redesign proposed by you; reverts commits
>>> fbe5a3fb73102c2cfec114a67943f4474383 and
>>> 5d4171d1c70edfe3e9be1de9e66603af28e3afe1, adds changes for that redesign
>>> to the core
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:08 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The file 006_logical_decoding_timelines.pl was removed by the commit c1543a8.
>> But currently 005_***.pl and 007_***.pl exist on source tree.
>> Should we change its file number to 006?
>
> I don't th
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > I don't understand why you want to change the default. Is it for
> > performance? Has it been measured?
> >
> >
> Yes. I've run into it multiple times, but I haven't specifically measured
> it. But I've had more than one situation where turning it off has
> com
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> I mean the only difference between toast / plain heap table WRT
> old_snapshot_threshold is that we don't use a mvcc snapshot.
We use different functions and never, ever call BufferGetPage --
except for deep in the bowels of the AMs. Count
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>> Is there a reason why it's coded like this? I think we should use the pg_ctl
>> instead or (at the very least) check the postmaster return code. Also,
>> perhaps we should add an explicit timeout, higher than 60
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 4:46 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Going through and doing testing now. Unfortunately, it doesn't look
> > like adding in testing of tablespaces into the TAP tests would be very
> > easy (the only TAP test that deals wi
Robert Haas writes:
> Mumble. Why, exactly, was this a good idea? The upside of commit
> 45639a0525a58a2700cf46d4c934d6de78349dac is only that you do fewer
> plan invalidations, but surely that's not a significant benefit for
> most people: user mappings don't change that often. On the downside
* Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 03:46:17PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 12:55:33AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > > * Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote:
> > > > > This PostgreSQL 9.6 ope
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> Mumble. Why, exactly, was this a good idea? The upside of commit
>> 45639a0525a58a2700cf46d4c934d6de78349dac is only that you do fewer
>> plan invalidations, but surely that's not a significant benefit for
>> most people
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> OK, I am doing that at the end.
>
> And also while moving on...
>
> On another topic, here are some ideas to extend CREATE/ALTER ROLE to
> support SCRAM password directly:
> 1) protocol PASSWORD value, where protocol is { MD5 | PLAIN | SCRA
On 07/20/2016 01:08 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
Logical Replication
Logical Replication is a method of replicating data objects and their
changes, based upon their Primary Keys (or Replication Identity). We
Do we want a limitation based on Primary Key, or would it be possible
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>I think Snapshot's members whenTaken and lsn are updated/initialized
>>only in GetSnapshotData(). So if GetSnapshotData() is not used, how
>>will you expect those fields to be updated. We need those fields to
>>be updated for TestForOldSnap
I can't help noticing that the failure rate on skink has gone from
"rare" to "100%" since 3d5b227:
http://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=skink&br=REL9_4_STABLE
I think we need to put some effort into figuring out what's up there.
Also, this morning curculio showed what might b
On 2016-07-20 11:26:11 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >>I think Snapshot's members whenTaken and lsn are updated/initialized
> >>only in GetSnapshotData(). So if GetSnapshotData() is not used, how
> >>will you expect those fields to be updated.
I wrote:
> I've still had no luck reproducing it here, though.
Hah --- I take that back. On about the fourth or fifth trial:
==00:00:00:34.291 21525== Invalid read of size 1
==00:00:00:34.291 21525==at 0x4A08DEC: memcpy (mc_replace_strmem.c:882)
==00:00:00:34.291 21525==by 0x66FA54: Deco
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
>
> And on Subscriber database:
>
> CREATE SUBSCRIPTION mysub WITH CONNECTION dbname=foo host=bar
> user=repuser PUBLICATION mypub;
>
>
>
> The above will start the replication process which synchronizes the
> initial t
On 12 July 2016 at 09:57, mailto:amatv...@bitec.ru>> wrote:
We have faced with some lack of sharing resources.
So in our test memory usage per session:
Oracle: about 5M
MSSqlServer: about 4M
postgreSql: about 160М
Using shared resources also has significant problems, so care
Hi,
On 2016-07-20 12:45:04 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I've still had no luck reproducing it here, though.
Same here so far.
> Hah --- I take that back. On about the fourth or fifth trial:
Interesting.
> ==00:00:00:34.291 21525== Invalid read of size 1
> ==00:00:00:34.291 21525==
On 20 July 2016 at 16:39, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Logical Replication is a method of replicating data objects and their
>> changes, based upon their Primary Keys (or Replication Identity). We
>>
>
> Do we want a limitation based on Primary Key, or would it be possible to
> use just UN
On 20 July 2016 at 17:52, Rod Taylor wrote:
> I think it's important for communication channels to be defined separately
> from the subscriptions.
>
I agree and believe it will be that way.
Craig is working on allowing Replication Slots to failover between nodes,
to provide exactly that reques
Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2016-07-20 11:26:11 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > >>I think Snapshot's members whenTaken and lsn are updated/initialized
> > >>only in GetSnapshotData(). So if GetSnapshotData() is not used, how
> > >>will you exp
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> And how do you obtain that? The functions that reference
>> SnapshotToast are toast_delete_datum, toastrel_value_exists, and
>> toast_fetch_datum, toast_fetch_datum_slice, but none of those take a
>> snapshot as an argument, nor is there a
On 2016-07-20 13:59:32 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> It's hard to believe that it's equally good to use the newest
> registered snapshot (which is, I think, what you will often get from
> GetActiveSnapshot()) and the oldest registered snapshot (which is what
> you will get from pairingheap_first()).
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> > OK, after hacking that for a bit I have finished with option 2 and the
> > set of PG-like set of routines, the use of USE_SSL in the file
> > containing all the SHA functions of OpenBSD has proved to be really
>
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 02:12:57PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Michael Paquier
> > wrote:
> > > OK, after hacking that for a bit I have finished with option 2 and the
> > > set of PG-like set of routines, the use of USE_SSL in the file
Seems you can't use UNION and COLLATE in the same SELECT statement; you
have to put the UNION inside of WITH and then do the COLLATE outside:
test=> SELECT 'a-c' AS x UNION ALL SELECT 'ab' AS x ORDER BY 1 COLLATE "C";
ERROR: collations are not supported by type integer
LINE 1: ... 'a-c' AS x
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> SELECT 'a-c' AS x UNION ALL SELECT 'ab' AS x ORDER BY x COLLATE "C";
::***> select 'a-c' COLLATE "C" AS x UNION ALL SELECT 'ab' AS x ORDER BY x ;
┌─┐
│ x │
├─┤
│ a-c │
│ ab │
└─┘
(2 rows)
But I think I agree that it's surp
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:38 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I think the 'ORDER BY x COLLATE "C"' is being parsed as an a_expr, and
> we don't allow a_expr in a UNION. Perhaps we are too strict here, but I
> can't tell.
>
ORDER BY 1 COLLATE "C" is indeed an expression - the number no longer
refers
Actually there's nothing about UNION here. It's true for any column alias:
::***> select 'a-c' AS x ORDER BY x COLLATE "C" ;
ERROR: 42703: column "x" does not exist
LINE 2: select 'a-c' AS x ORDER BY x COLLATE "C" ;
^
LOCATION: errorMissingColumn, parse_relatio
Greg Stark writes:
> But I think I agree that it's surprising that the collate clause isn't
> working in the ORDER BY on a column produced by a UNION. Certainly
> that's where people usually want to put it.
See this ancient comment in transformSetOperationStmt:
* For now, we don't support r
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:55:38PM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > SELECT 'a-c' AS x UNION ALL SELECT 'ab' AS x ORDER BY x COLLATE "C";
>
>
> ::***> select 'a-c' COLLATE "C" AS x UNION ALL SELECT 'ab' AS x ORDER BY x ;
Oh, collate on the str
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 06:03:08PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Stark writes:
> > But I think I agree that it's surprising that the collate clause isn't
> > working in the ORDER BY on a column produced by a UNION. Certainly
> > that's where people usually want to put it.
>
> See this ancient com
On 20/07/16 19:07, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 20 July 2016 at 16:39, Joshua D. Drake mailto:j...@commandprompt.com>> wrote:
Logical Replication uses a Publish and Subscribe model
with one or
more Subscribers subscribing to one or more Publications on a
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> OK, I am doing that at the end.
>>
>> And also while moving on...
>>
>> On another topic, here are some ideas to extend CREATE/ALTER ROLE to
>> support SCRAM password directly:
>> 1
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 5:25 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 02:12:57PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Michael Paquier wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Michael Paquier
>> > wrote:
>> > > OK, after hacking that for a bit I have finished with option 2 and the
>> > > se
Andres Freund writes:
> I guess either using valgrind's gdb server on error, or putting some
> asserts checking the size would be best. I can look into it, but it'll
> not be today likely.
I believe the problem is that DecodeUpdate is not on the same page as the
WAL-writing routines about how muc
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 09:01:05PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 06:09:59PM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 9:10 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 06:48:08PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > >> This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due fo
On 21 July 2016 at 01:20, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 20 July 2016 at 17:52, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
>
>> I think it's important for communication channels to be defined
>> separately from the subscriptions.
>>
>
> I agree and believe it will be that way.
>
> Craig is working on allowing Replication Slo
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Amit Kapila
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Michael Paquier
w
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, I think that is totally different angle to fix this issue, so
>>> don't you think it is better to start a separate thread to discuss
>>> about it for 10.0 and mark thi
On 07/20/2016 06:35 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
First, I'd like to emphasise that logical replication has been stalled
for ages now because we can no longer make forward progress on core
features needed until we have in-core logical replication (they're
dismissed as irrelevant, no in core users, etc
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
Yeah, I think that is totally different angle to fix this issue, so
don't you think it is better to start
On 21 July 2016 at 11:05, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 07/20/2016 06:35 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>
> First, I'd like to emphasise that logical replication has been stalled
>> for ages now because we can no longer make forward progress on core
>> features needed until we have in-core logical replica
Hi,
I have been trying MADlib [1], a machine-learning library for PostgreSQL,
and when I was tying it on 9.5 and 9.6beta2, I often got following
error on my box.
madpack.py : ERROR : SQL command failed:
SQL: DROP OWNED BY madlib_19_installcheck CASCADE;
ERROR:
On 2016/07/19 22:53, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> I am seeing following warning with this set of patches.
> gram.y:4734:24: warning: assignment from incompatible pointer type [enabled
> by default]
Thanks, will fix. Was a copy-paste error.
Thanks,
Amit
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pg
Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been trying MADlib [1], a machine-learning library for PostgreSQL,
> and when I was tying it on 9.5 and 9.6beta2, I often got following
> error on my box.
>
>
> madpack.py : ERROR : SQL command failed:
> SQL: DROP OWNED
Folks,
Please find attached a patch which makes it possible to disallow
UPDATEs and DELETEs which lack a WHERE clause. As this changes query
behavior, I've made the new GUCs PGC_SUSET.
What say?
Thanks to Gurjeet Singh for the idea and Andrew Gierth for the tips
implementing.
Best,
David.
--
2016-07-21 13:53 GMT+09:00 Alvaro Herrera :
> Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have been trying MADlib [1], a machine-learning library for PostgreSQL,
>> and when I was tying it on 9.5 and 9.6beta2, I often got following
>> error on my box.
>>
>>
>> madpac
55 matches
Mail list logo
