Re: [HACKERS] Add support for restrictive RLS policies

2016-12-01 Thread Stephen Frost
Dean, * Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote: > On 1 December 2016 at 14:38, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote: > >> In get_policies_for_relation() ... > >> ... I think it should sort the restrictive policies by name > > > >

[HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] postgres 1 个(共 2 个) can pg 9.6 vacuum freeze skip page on index?

2016-12-01 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:33 AM, xu jian wrote: > Hello, > >Please execute me if I am using the wrong mailing list, but I ask the > question in pgsql-admin, looks like no one know the answer. > > > we upgraded our pg db to 9.6, as we know, pg9.6 doesn't need full table

[HACKERS] 答复: [HACKERS] postgres 1 个(共 2 个) can pg 9.6 vacuum freeze skip page on index?

2016-12-01 Thread xu jian
Hi Masahiko, Thanks for your reply. Is there any reason to update index statistics even if there is no changes on the table? or is there any way to disable index statistics update during vacuum freeze? thanks James 发件人: Masahiko Sawada

Re: [HACKERS] pg_xlogdump follow into the future

2016-12-01 Thread Vladimir Rusinov
This patch does not have a reviewer, so I've decided to try myself on. Disclaimer: although I review quite a lot of code daily, this is my first review for PostgreSQL. I don't know code very well, and frankly I don't really know C very well. Hope my effort are not vain and will be helpful to

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench - allow backslash continuations in \set expressions

2016-12-01 Thread Fabien COELHO
Hello Daniel, - if not, are possible corner case backward incompatibilities introduced by such feature ok? In psql, if backslash followed by [CR]LF is interpreted as a continuation symbol, commands like these seem problematic on Windows since backslash is the directory separator: \cd \

Re: [HACKERS] Add support for restrictive RLS policies

2016-12-01 Thread Stephen Frost
Dean, * Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote: > On 30 November 2016 at 21:54, Stephen Frost wrote: > > Unless there's further comments, I'll plan to push this sometime > > tomorrow. > > Sorry I didn't have time to look at this properly. I was intending to, > but my

Re: [HACKERS] Cache Hash Index meta page.

2016-12-01 Thread Jesper Pedersen
On 09/28/2016 11:55 AM, Mithun Cy wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: > I think that this needs to be updated again for v8 of concurrent and v5 of wal Adding the rebased patch over [1] + [2] As the concurrent hash index patch was committed in

[HACKERS] s/xlog/wal/ in tools and function names?

2016-12-01 Thread Vladimir Rusinov
I've found myself wondering "where is my xlog" after running pg_switch_xlog() in 10.0. Renaming pg_xlog to pg_wal created inconsistency between tools, function names and directory name on disk. Should we also: - rename pg_switch_xlog and friends to pg_switch_wal? - rename pg_recievexlog to

Re: [HACKERS] Improving RLS planning

2016-12-01 Thread Stephen Frost
Dean, * Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote: > Hmm. I've not read any of the new code yet, but the fact that this > test now reduces to a one-time filter makes it effectively useless as > a test of qual evaluation order because it has deduced that it doesn't > need to evaluate them. I

Re: [HACKERS] Microvacuum support for Hash Index

2016-12-01 Thread Jesper Pedersen
On 11/11/2016 12:11 AM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: Thanks for reviewing this patch. I would like to update you that this patch has got dependency on a patch for concurrent hash index and WAL log in hash index. So, till these two patches for hash index are not stable I won't be able to share you a

Re: [HACKERS] Add support for restrictive RLS policies

2016-12-01 Thread Dean Rasheed
On 1 December 2016 at 14:38, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote: >> In get_policies_for_relation() ... >> ... I think it should sort the restrictive policies by name > > Hmmm, is it really the case that the quals will always end up being >

Re: [HACKERS] Hash Indexes

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:18 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> [ new patch ] >> >> Committed with some further cosmetic

Re: [HACKERS] UNDO and in-place update

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> I think we need to avoid putting the visibility information in the >> index because that will make the index much bigger. > > I agree that there will be an increase in index size, but it shouldn't > be much if we

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel execution and prepared statements

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 6:24 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> >>> Robert, do you have any better ideas for this

Re: [HACKERS] s/xlog/wal/ in tools and function names?

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Vladimir Rusinov wrote: > I've found myself wondering "where is my xlog" after running > pg_switch_xlog() in 10.0. > > Renaming pg_xlog to pg_wal created inconsistency between tools, function > names and directory name on disk. > > Should we

Re: [HACKERS] Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: >>> Unless we want to wait until that work is committed before

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Build HTML documentation using XSLT stylesheets by default

2016-12-01 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Pavel Stehule wrote: > It does much more intensive work with IO - I have feeling like there are > intensive fsync. You could prove that, by running "make html" under "strace -f -e trace=fsync" etc. I just tried that, and I don't see any fsync. I guess you could try other syscalls, or simply

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel safety of CURRENT_* family

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
<5bih4k+4jfl6m39j...@guerrillamail.com> writes: > How should I mark a function which calls CURRENT_DATE? Parallel safe or > parallel restricted? > pg_proc shows that now() is marked as restricted, but transaction_timestamp() > is marked as safe. That's certainly silly, because they're

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] 答复: [HACKERS] postgres 1 个(共 2 个) can pg 9.6 vacuum freeze skip page on index?

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > I think that the indexes only need to be scanned if the VACUUM finds > dead tuples. But even 1 dead tuple will cause a complete scan of > every index. I've complained about this before and I think there's > room for improvement here, but nobody's

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-12-01 14:22:19 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: >> > The SSL test suite (src/test/ssl) is broken in the master since commit >> >

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > Well, I don't quite know what the alternative is. For some reason, which > I don't quite understand personally, people care about security during > regression tests runs. So we can't run the test automatedly. And nobody >

[HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] 答复: [HACKERS] postgres 1 个(共 2 个) can pg 9.6 vacuum freeze skip page on index?

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> I think that the indexes only need to be scanned if the VACUUM finds >> dead tuples. But even 1 dead tuple will cause a complete scan of >> every index. I've complained about

[HACKERS] Parallel safety of CURRENT_* family

2016-12-01 Thread 5bih4k+4jfl6m39j23k
Hello How should I mark a function which calls CURRENT_DATE? Parallel safe or parallel restricted? pg_proc shows that now() is marked as restricted, but transaction_timestamp() is marked as safe. The manual (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/functions-datetime.html) says that "now()

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > Well, if people are unwilling to add test suites to 'make > check-world', we can add 'make check-universe' and I'll run that > instead. And that can come with a big shiny disclaimer. I just want > a way to compile and run EVERYTHING that people care

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > As you can see, after the patch libpq will now look at hostaddr rather than > host when validating the server certificate because that is what is stored > in the first (and only) entry of conn->connhost, and therefore

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > The SSL test suite (src/test/ssl) is broken in the master since commit > 9a1d0af4ad2cbd419115b453d811c141b80d872b, which is Robert's refactoring of > getting the server hostname for GSS, SSPI, and SSL in libpq. So, we

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel safety of CURRENT_* family

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > <5bih4k+4jfl6m39j...@guerrillamail.com> writes: >> pg_proc shows that now() is marked as restricted, but >> transaction_timestamp() is marked as safe. > That's certainly silly, because they're equivalent. I should think > they're both safe. Robert? ... well, they would be if we

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Andres Freund
On 2016-12-01 14:43:04 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2016-12-01 14:22:19 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Andreas Karlsson > >> wrote: > >> > The SSL test suite

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench - allow backslash continuations in \set expressions

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Fabien COELHO writes: >> In psql, if backslash followed by [CR]LF is interpreted as a >> continuation symbol, commands like these seem problematic >> on Windows since backslash is the directory separator: >> >> \cd \ >> \cd c:\somepath\ >> >> Shell invocations also come to

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Andres Freund
On 2016-12-01 14:22:19 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > > The SSL test suite (src/test/ssl) is broken in the master since commit > > 9a1d0af4ad2cbd419115b453d811c141b80d872b, which is Robert's refactoring of > > getting the

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > On 2016-12-01 14:43:04 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> I get that, but this is the second time in very recent history that >> I've broken something because there was code that wasn't compiled or >> tests that weren't run by 'make check-world'. > Well, I

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> check-world isn't a magic bullet. > No, but deliberately leaving things out that could be run isn't > helping anything either. Tests that open security holes while running aren't

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel safety of CURRENT_* family

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> ... well, they would be if we passed down xactStartTimestamp to parallel >> workers, but I can't find any code that does that. In view of the fact that >> transaction_timestamp()

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> check-world isn't a magic bullet. > >> No, but deliberately leaving things out that could be run isn't >>

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: scan key push down to heap [WIP]

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 5:41 AM, Dilip Kumar wrote: > 1. As we decided to separate scankey and qual during planning time. So > I am doing it at create_seqscan_path. My question is currently we > don't have path node for seqscan, so where should we store scankey ? > In Path

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel safety of CURRENT_* family

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> ... well, they would be if we passed down xactStartTimestamp to parallel >>> workers, but I can't find any

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel safety of CURRENT_* family

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> but it doesn't: >> >> regression=# select distinct transaction_timestamp() from tenk1; >> transaction_timestamp >> --- >> 2016-12-01 15:44:12.839417-05

Re: [HACKERS] Mail thread references in commits

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Greg Stark wrote: >> I can't say I feel especially strongly either way on this but just to >> toss out a small thing that might make a small difference >> >> If you happen to know how your

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 5:17 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: >> As you can see, after the patch libpq will now look at hostaddr rather than >> host when validating the server certificate because that is

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: scan key push down to heap [WIP]

2016-12-01 Thread Andres Freund
On 2016-11-30 16:11:23 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote: > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote: > >> Actually we want to call slot_getattr instead heap_getattr, because of > >> problem

Re: [HACKERS] Mail thread references in commits

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Greg Stark wrote: > On 30 November 2016 at 16:19, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/cab7npqthydyf-fo+fzvxrhz-7_hptm4rodbcsy9-noqhvet...@mail.gmail.com >> >> I'll be interested to know if it

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> Well, if people are unwilling to add test suites to 'make >> check-world', we can add 'make check-universe' and I'll run that >> instead. And that can come with a big shiny

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel safety of CURRENT_* family

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: >> <5bih4k+4jfl6m39j...@guerrillamail.com> writes: >>> pg_proc shows that now() is marked as restricted, but >>> transaction_timestamp() is marked as safe. > >> That's certainly silly, because they're equivalent. I

Re: [HACKERS] Wrong order of tests in findDependentObjects()

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: >> Jim Nasby writes: >>> I can't think of any reason you'd want the current behavior. >> But I think fixing it to not recurse to extensions during temp namespace >> cleanup might not be very hard. I'll take a look. I wrote a test case to try to demonstrate

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 5:56 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 4:16 AM, Mithun Cy wrote: >> Reason is we first decode the URI(percent encoded character) then try to >> split the string into multiple host assuming they are separated

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 5:46 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Robert Haas writes: >>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote: check-world isn't a magic

Re: [HACKERS] PoC: Partial sort

2016-12-01 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:04 PM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > you assigned as reviewer to the current patch in the 11-2016 commitfest. > But you haven't shared your review yet in this commitfest on the latest > patch posted by the author. If you don't have any comments on

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 4:16 AM, Mithun Cy wrote: > On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Andreas Karlsson > wrote: >> Another thought about this code: should we not check if it is a unix >> socket first before splitting the host? While I doubt that it

Re: [HACKERS] Mail thread references in commits

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> When and if somebody tries to game that, we can do something about it, >> but I'm not very worried. It's not like it's not trivial to get your >> company's name, or $badword of

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API

2016-12-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On 29 November 2016 at 15:13, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 14 November 2016 at 15:50, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Andres Freund wrote: >>> I'm very tempted to rename this during the move to GUCs >> ... >>>

Re: [HACKERS] Mail thread references in commits

2016-12-01 Thread Stephen Frost
All, * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > I think this is a straw man. We've already decided to use message-IDs > as the basic identity of messages for this purpose; other proposals > were considered before and rejected as too inconvenient. I tend to agree with Tom on this, for better or

Re: [HACKERS] Mail thread references in commits

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost writes: > Further, we seem agreed that URLs are what we want to have in the > commits rather than just the message-ID. If we're set on doing that, then ... > The question on the table at the moment seems to be if we want to use > https://postgr.es/m/ or

Re: [HACKERS] Wrong order of tests in findDependentObjects()

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Jim Nasby writes: > On 12/1/16 1:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I think that the patch I wrote is good cleanup, so I'm still inclined >> to apply it in HEAD, but I no longer think it's fixing any case that's >> significant in the field. I wonder if you have a counterexample?

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 5:17 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: >>> As you can see, after the patch libpq will now look at

Re: [HACKERS] Mail thread references in commits

2016-12-01 Thread Stephen Frost
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > This: > > >> Discussion: > >> https://postgr.es/m/20161128182113.6527.58...@wrigleys.postgresql.org > >> Discussion: > >>

Re: [HACKERS] Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes

2016-12-01 Thread Amit Kapila
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Jeff Janes

Re: [HACKERS] XactLockTableWait doesn't set wait_event correctly

2016-12-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On 2 December 2016 at 00:28, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:50 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> Obtaining a tuple lock requires two separate actions: First we do >> LockTuple() and then we do XactLockTableWait(). > > I think that's kind of a

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel safety of CURRENT_* family

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > Yeah, I didn't have any doubt that it was real. Still don't know > why my test case isn't doing what I expected, though. Doh: the planner knows that transaction_timestamp() is stable, so it concludes that the DISTINCT condition is vacuous. There is a "Unique" node in the plan, but it

Re: [HACKERS] Mail thread references in commits

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Greg Stark wrote: >>> I can't say I feel especially strongly either way on this but just to >>> toss out a small thing that might

Re: [HACKERS] Mail thread references in commits

2016-12-01 Thread Andres Freund
On 2016-12-01 18:05:19 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > ... the shortener isn't really doing anything for us. You end up with a > line longer than 80 characters with message-IDs generated by either gmail > or the bug report form, for instance these examples from recent commits: Still seems quite useful

Re: [HACKERS] Wrong order of tests in findDependentObjects()

2016-12-01 Thread Jim Nasby
On 12/1/16 1:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I think that the patch I wrote is good cleanup, so I'm still inclined to apply it in HEAD, but I no longer think it's fixing any case that's significant in the field. I wonder if you have a counterexample? No; I'm sure I've run into this because of a temp

Re: [HACKERS] Mail thread references in commits

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > This: >> Discussion: >> https://postgr.es/m/20161128182113.6527.58...@wrigleys.postgresql.org >> Discussion: >> https://postgr.es/m/CA+renyUEE29=X01JXdz8_TQvo6n9=2xoebbrnq8rklyr+kj...@mail.gmail.com > still looks better than: >> Discussion: >>

Re: [HACKERS] Mail thread references in commits

2016-12-01 Thread Andres Freund
On 2016-12-01 18:12:34 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> When and if somebody tries to game that, we can do something about it, > >> but I'm not very worried. It's not like it's not

Re: [HACKERS] XactLockTableWait doesn't set wait_event correctly

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:50 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > Obtaining a tuple lock requires two separate actions: First we do > LockTuple() and then we do XactLockTableWait(). I think that's kind of a confusing way of looking at it. LockTuple() waits for a "tuple" lmgr lock,

Re: [HACKERS] PoC: Partial sort

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 4:32 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 8:02 AM, Alexander Korotkov >> wrote: >> > Hmm... I'm not completely agree with that. In

[HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] 答复: [HACKERS] postgres 1 个(共 2 个) can pg 9.6 vacuum freeze skip page on index?

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:45 AM, xu jian wrote: > Thanks for your reply. Is there any reason to update index > statistics even if there is no changes on the table? > or is there any way to disable index statistics update during vacuum freeze? > thanks I think that the

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > > > On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 10:12 PM, Pavan Deolasee > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Haribabu Kommi >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Thanks for the

Re: [HACKERS] Rename max_parallel_degree?

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 3:38 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: > > On 10/12/16 7:58 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > >> I don't think it's wrong that the handling is done there, though. The > >>

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Reload SSL certificates on SIGHUP

2016-12-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > I have attached a new version. The commitfest should technically have been > closed by now, so do what you like with the status. I can always submit the > patch to the next commitfest. I have just moved it to the next

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 03:17:34PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> It might be that (as suggested downthread) we should consider >> supporting multiple IPs in the hostaddr string as well, but that >> requires some

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump / copy bugs with "big lines" ?

2016-12-01 Thread Alvaro Herrera
I have now pushed this to 9.5, 9.6 and master. It could be backpatched to 9.4 with ease (just a small change in heap_form_tuple); anything further back would require much more effort. I used a 32-bit limit using sizeof(int32). I tested and all the mentioned cases seem to work sanely; if you

Re: [HACKERS] Fast Default WIP patch for discussion

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:28 AM, Serge Rielau wrote: > Time for me to dig into that then. > Closed in 2016-11 commitfest with "returned with feedback" status. Please feel free to update the status once you submit the updated patch. Regards, Hari Babu Fujitsu Australia

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

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 10/4/16 10:47 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote: > > 03.10.2016 15:29, Anastasia Lubennikova: > >> 03.10.2016 05:22, Michael Paquier: > >>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:17 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova > >>>

Re: [HACKERS] Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress

2016-12-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:59 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Kyotaro

Re: [HACKERS] DROP FUNCTION of multiple functions

2016-12-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 11/23/16 5:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I looked at this briefly. I agree that 0001-0003 are simple cleanup of > the grammar and could be pushed without further ado. Done. > However, starting > with 0004 I begin to get queasy. The plan seems to be that instead of > "objname" always being a List

Re: [HACKERS] pg_sequence catalog

2016-12-01 Thread Andreas Karlsson
I think this patch looks good now so I am setting it to ready for committer. I like the idea of the patch and I think that while this change will break some tools which look at the sequence relations I think the advantages are worth it (for example making more sequence DDL respecting MVCC).

[HACKERS] 答复: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] 答复: [HACKERS] postgres 1 个(共 2 个) can pg 9.6 vacuum freeze skip page on index?

2016-12-01 Thread xu jian
Thanks every for your help. I am not familiar with the internal of the vacuum freeze, just curious if there is no row change on the table(in other words, all pages are frozen), why could index page have dead tuple? is it possible to scan data page first, if all data page are frozen, skipping

Re: [HACKERS] pg_recvlogical --endpos

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Okano, Naoki wrote: > > On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 10:34 AM Craig Ringer wrote: > >On 30 November 2016 at 09:18, Okano, Naoki > > > wrote: > >> > >> On November 29, 2016 at 5:03 PM Craig

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw super user checks

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Robert Haas > wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 2:18 AM, Michael Paquier > > wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 3:33 AM,

Re: [HACKERS] Add support for restrictive RLS policies

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Dean, > > * Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote: > > On 1 December 2016 at 14:38, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > * Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote: > > >> In

Re: [HACKERS] PassDownLimitBound for ForeignScan/CustomScan [take-2]

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Kouhei Kaigai wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 6:54 AM, Jeevan Chalke > > wrote: > > > 1. ps_numTuples is declared as long, however offset and count members > in > > > LimitState struct and bound member in

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Mithun Cy
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 2:26 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >Yeah, we should change that. Are you going to write a patch? Thanks, will work on this will produce a patch to patch to fix. -- Thanks and Regards Mithun C Y EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: [HACKERS] LOCK TABLE .. DEFERRABLE

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On 1 September 2016 at 21:28, Simon Riggs wrote: > >> So the only way to handle multiple locks is to do this roughly

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-12-01 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sun, 27 Nov 2016 21:54:46 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > I've attached the v15 of the patch > I've not applied patch patch_pg_current_logfile-v14.diff.backoff to > prevent constant call of logfile_writename() on a busy system (errno = > ENFILE | EMFILE). I don't

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Michael Paquier writes: > On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> Correct, but I'm defining that as user error. If hostaddr is >> specified, host is not used to decide what to connect to, so it makes >> no sense for it to be a

Re: [HACKERS] Logical Replication WIP

2016-12-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 11/30/16 8:06 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 30/11/16 22:37, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> I have taken the libpqwalreceiver refactoring patch and split it into >> two: one for the latch change, one for the API change. I have done some >> mild editing. >> >> These two patches are now ready to

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Paquier writes: >> Would it be better to return NULL instead then. > > That would likely just result in application core dumps. > See notes for commit 490cb21f7. That's 40cb21f7 actually.

Re: [HACKERS] XactLockTableWait doesn't set wait_event correctly

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 2 December 2016 at 00:28, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:50 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >>> Obtaining a tuple lock requires two separate actions: First we do

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 12/1/16 4:53 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > The reason why the SSL test suite is not in check-world is that SSL > cannot be used with unix domain sockets, making it unfit in shared > environments. If that is it, that could be changed. -- Peter Eisentraut

Re: [HACKERS] PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 4:43 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > I prefer the commands instead symbols - the parsing and processing symbols > should be more complex than it is now. A psql parser is very simple - and > any complex syntax enforces lot of code. > > \if_not Given the

Re: [HACKERS] PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless

2016-12-01 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > Given the precedent in pgbench (cf. > 878fdcb843e087cc1cdeadc987d6ef55202ddd04), I think it requires an > amazing level of optimism to suppose we won't eventually end up with a > full-blown expression language here. I would suggest designing one >

Re: [HACKERS] s/xlog/wal/ in tools and function names?

2016-12-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 3:21 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Vladimir Rusinov wrote: >> I've found myself wondering "where is my xlog" after running >> pg_switch_xlog() in 10.0. >> >> Renaming pg_xlog to pg_wal created

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Reload SSL certificates on SIGHUP

2016-12-01 Thread Andreas Karlsson
On 11/30/2016 06:52 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Michael Paquier Looking at the latest patch at code-level, there is some refactoring to introduce initialize_context(). But it is actually not necessary (perhaps this is the remnant of a past version?) as

Re: [HACKERS] Stopping logical replication protocol

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 12:44 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 21 October 2016 at 19:38, Vladimir Gordiychuk wrote: > > Craig, Andres what do you thinks about previous message? > > I haven't had a chance to look further to be honest. > > Since a downstream

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 7:31 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > * Move recovery.conf parameters into postgresql.conf > Allow reload of most parameters, allow ALTER SYSTEM > Provide visibility of values through GUC interface +1. > * recovery.conf is replaced by recovery.trigger ->

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API

2016-12-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 7:31 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> * pg_basebackup -R >> will write recovery.trigger to data directory >> insert parameters postgresql.conf.auto, if possible > > Don't

Re: [HACKERS] btree_gin and btree_gist for enums

2016-12-01 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > I won't have time to fix this before the end of the Commitfest The patch is marked as "returned with feedback" in 2016-11 commitfest. Please free to submit an updated patch to the next commitfest. Regards, Hari

Re: [HACKERS] Broken SSL tests in master

2016-12-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 5:17 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Andreas Karlsson

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API

2016-12-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 7:31 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: >>> * pg_basebackup -R >>> will write recovery.trigger to

Re: [HACKERS] Logical Replication WIP

2016-12-01 Thread Thomas Munro
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 11/30/16 8:06 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> On 30/11/16 22:37, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> I have taken the libpqwalreceiver refactoring patch and split it into >>> two: one for the latch change, one for

  1   2   >