Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump --pretty-print-views

/restore docs for 9.3. Had someone asking me about this feature for pg_extractor https://github.com/omniti-labs/pg_extractor/issues/28 -- Keith Fiske Database Administrator OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. http://www.keithf4.com

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump --pretty-print-views

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Keith Fiske ke...@omniti.com writes: On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Applied with corrections. Was this ever committed into core? Apologies, I'm not very familiar with looking through

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #9652: inet types don't support min/max

into test_inet (ipaddress) values ('127.0.0.1'); INSERT 0 1 Time: 1.786 ms keith=# select min(ipaddress) from test_inet; min --- 127.0.0.1 (1 row) Time: 3.371 ms keith=# select max(ipaddress) from test_inet; max - 192.168.1.2 (1 row) Time: 1.104 ms -- Keith Fiske Database

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #9652: inet types don't support min/max

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:46 AM, Keith Fiske ke...@omniti.com wrote: Andres's changes on June 3rd to https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commits/master/src/test/regress/expected/create_function_3.out

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Question about partial functional indexes and the query planner

on partial_functional_idx (cost=0.00..81.42 rows=5000 width=0) (actual time=39.657..39.657 rows=50 loops=1) Planning time: 0.127 ms Execution time: 2483.979 ms (7 rows) -- Keith Fiske Database Administrator OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. http://www.keithf4.com

[HACKERS] Allow GRANT TRIGGER privilege to DROP TRIGGER (Re: Bug ##7716)

guidance on how to go about it. Thanks! -- Keith Fiske Database Administrator OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. http://www.keithf4.com

Re: [HACKERS] 9.5 make world failing due to sgml tools missing

http://www.keithf4.com On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: On 6/18/15 8:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Sure; the point is that libxml2 has suddenly been reclassified as a documentation build tool, which is at least a surprising categorization. libxml2 has

Re: [HACKERS] Index corruption with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:17 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Amit Kapila writes: > >> Hmm. Consider that the first time relcahe invalidation occurs while > >> computing

Re: [HACKERS] Index corruption with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Keith Fiske wrote: > > > Was just curious if anyone was able to come up with any sort of method to > > test whether an index was corrupted by this bug, other than just waiting > >

Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take

e_p2015 FOR VALUES FROM ('2017-03-01 00:00:00-05') TO ('2017-04-01 00:00:00-04') -- Keith Fiske Database Administrator OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. http://www.keithf4.com

Re: [HACKERS] kqueue

umber of transactions actually processed: 4341447 latency average: 0.884 ms tps = 72350.152281 (including connections establishing) tps = 72421.831179 (excluding connections establishing) -- Keith Fiske Database Administrator OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. http://www.keithf4.com

Re: [HACKERS] kqueue

On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:11 PM, Thomas Munro < thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Thomas Munro > <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Keith Fiske <ke...@omniti.com> wrote: > >>

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Implement table partitioning.

On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 10:01 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Keith Fiske <ke...@omniti.com> wrote: > > Another suggestion I had was for handling when data is inserted that > doesn't > > match any defined child tables

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Implement table partitioning.

On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Keith Fiske <ke...@omniti.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Keith, >> >> On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 3:00 AM, Keith Fiske <ke...@omniti.com> wro

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Implement table partitioning.

On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Keith, > > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 3:00 AM, Keith Fiske <ke...@omniti.com> wrote: > > Being that table partitioning is something I'm slightly interested in, > > figured I'd give

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Implement table partitioning.

On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > Implement table partitioning. > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your

Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take

anything in core. Not sure if there's anywhere else this would need to be fixed. -- Keith Fiske Database Administrator OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. http://www.keithf4.com diff --git a/src/backend/catalog/information_schema.sql b/src/backend/catalog/information_schema.sql index 4df390a..c31d0d8

Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take

Could we get some clarification on the partition_bound_spec portion of the PARTITION OF clause? Just doing some testing it seems it's inclusive of the FROM value but exclusive of the TO value. I don't see mention of this in the docs as of commit 18fc5192a631441a73e6a3b911ecb14765140389 yesterday.

Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

on is removed, there's still an issue of data duplication after the necessary child table is added. So guess it's a matter of deciding which user experience is better for the moment? -- Keith Fiske Database Administrator OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. http://www.keithf4.com

Re: [HACKERS] pg_partman 3.0.0 - real-world usage of native partitioning and a case for native default

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 5:13 AM, Ashutosh Bapat < ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Keith Fiske <ke...@omniti.com> wrote: > >> I've gotten pg_partman working with native partitioning already so I can >> hopeful

Re: [HACKERS] pg_partman 3.0.0 - real-world usage of native partitioning and a case for native default

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Ashutosh Bapat < ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > >>> Thankfully since native partitioning still uses inheritance internally for the most part, pg_partman works pretty well without nearly as much change as I thought I would

Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 1:18 AM, Amit Langote <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > On 2017/04/06 13:08, Keith Fiske wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Keith Fiske wrote: > >> Only issue I see with this, and I'm not sure if it is an issue, is what > >> h

Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 7:30 AM, Rahila Syed wrote: > Hello, > > Thanks a lot for testing and reporting this. Please find attached an > updated patch with the fix. The patch also contains a fix > regarding operator used at the time of creating expression as default >

Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Keith Fiske <ke...@omniti.com> wrote: > > > Only issue I see with this, and I'm not sure if it is an issue, is what > happens to that default constraint clause when 1000s of partitions start > getting added? From what I gather the default'

Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Rahila Syed > wrote: > >>Could you briefly elaborate why you think the lack global index support > >>would be a problem in this regard? > > I think following can

Re: [HACKERS] Passing values to a dynamic background worker

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 5:40 AM, Amit Langote <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp > wrote: > On 2017/04/18 18:12, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 16:19:13 -0400, Keith Fiske wrote: > >> So after reading a recent thread on the steep learning curve for PG >

Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

can't add a necessary child due to data being in the default, how can they ever get it out? Just leave it to the user to keep an eye on the default and fix it as necessary. This is what I do in pg_partman. -- Keith Fiske Database Administrator OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. http://www.keithf4.com

Re: [HACKERS] Partitioned tables vs GRANT

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 8:41 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Keith Fiske <ke...@omniti.com> writes: > > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> writes: > >>> Appare

Re: [HACKERS] Partitioned tables vs GRANT

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway writes: > > Apparently INSERT and SELECT on the parent partitioned table skip normal > > acl checks on the partitions. Is that intended behavior? > > Yes, this matches normal inheritance

[HACKERS] pg_partman 3.0.0 - real-world usage of native partitioning and a case for native default

out having to wait for the next major version. Spoke with several core members at PGConf this year and they asked me to send an email to hackers making my case, so here it is! -- Keith Fiske Database Administrator OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. http://www.keithf4.com

Re: [HACKERS] Partitioned tables vs GRANT

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Joe Conway wrote: > Apparently INSERT and SELECT on the parent partitioned table skip normal > acl checks on the partitions. Is that intended behavior? > > 8<--- > test=# create user part_test; > CREATE ROLE > test=# >

[HACKERS] Passing values to a dynamic background worker

guidance for a newer internals dev here would be great. 1. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH%3Dt1kqwCBF7J1bP0RjgsTcp-SaJaHrF4Yhb1iiQZMe3W-FX2w%40mail.gmail.com -- Keith Fiske Database Administrator OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. http://www.keithf4.com

Re: [HACKERS] Passing values to a dynamic background worker

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 4/17/17 16:19, Keith Fiske wrote: > > I've reached a roadblock in that bgw_main_arg can only accept a single > > argument that must be passed by value for a dynamic bgw. I alre