On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 5:43 PM Dipesh Pandit wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > I agree, I missed this part. The .history file should be given higher
> > preference.
> > I will take care of it in the next patch.
>
> Archiver does not have access to shared memory and the current timeline ID
> is not available
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 7:02 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> On 7/19/21 1:00 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 3:12 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> a. Just log it and move to the next row
> >> b. send to stats collector some info about this which can be displayed
> >> in a view and then
On Mon, 12 Jul 2021 at 19:23, David Rowley wrote:
> I also adjusted the hash seq scan code so that it performs better when
> faced a non-sparsely populated table. Previously my benchmark for
> that case didn't do well [2].
I was running some select only pgbench tests today on an AMD 3990x
On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 12:26 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > I can try that on the gcc farm in a bit.
Thanks!
> Hmm, it compiles cleanly, but something seems drastically wrong,
> because performance is just awful. On the other hand, I don't
> know what sort of storage is underlying this instance, so
On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 at 08:00, Andres Freund wrote:
> I have *not* carefully benchmarked this, but a quick implementation of this
> does seem to increase readonly pgbench tps at a small scale by 2-3% (both
Interesting.
I've not taken the time to study the patch but I was running some
other
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 04:03:33PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Another advantage of this patch is the handling of ".gz" is reduced to
> one code path instead of four. That makes a bit easier the
> introduction of new compression methods.
>
> A second thing that was really confusing is that
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 4:31 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 3:12 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > > Maybe a second option is to have replication change any UPDATE into
> > > either an INSERT or a DELETE, if the old or the new row do not pass the
> > > filter, respectively. That
On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 09:03:21AM -0700, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 10:22 AM Zhihong Yu wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 9:35 AM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 06:49:45PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > > On 29 Jun 2021, at 18:50,
At Mon, 19 Jul 2021 10:23:46 -0400, Tom Lane wrote in
> Michael Paquier writes:
> > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 04:15:36PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> >> When rotation happens, the metainfo file is once removed then
> >> created. If slurp_file in the metafile-checking loop hits the gap, the
>
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 4:08 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
[...]
> Thanks for the updated patch, the patch applies cleanly and test passes:
> I had couple of comments:
> 1) Should we include "stream_prepare_cb" here in
> logicaldecoding-streaming section of logicaldecoding.sgml
> documentation:
> To
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 3:28 PM Greg Nancarrow wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 6:33 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > Please find attached the latest patch set v97*
> >
>
> I couldn't spot spot any significant issues in the v97-0001 patch, but
> do have the following trivial feedback comments:
>
Please find attached the latest patch set v98*
Patches:
v97-0001 --> v98-0001
Differences:
* Rebased to HEAD @ yesterday.
* Code/Docs changes:
1. Fixed the same strcpy problem as reported by Tom Lane [1] for the
previous 2PC patch.
2. Addressed all feedback suggestions given by Greg [2].
Hi hackers.
This is the patch to add kerberos delegation support in libpq, which
enables postgres_fdw to connect to another server and authenticate
as the same user to the current login user. This will obsolete my
previous patch which requires keytab file to be present on the fdw
server host.
On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 11:47 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> Attach rebased patches.
>
Just letting you know that CRLFs are in the patch comments for the
0001 and 0003 patches.
(It doesn't affect patch application)
Regards,
Greg Nancarrow
Fujitsu Australia
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 7:20 PM Chris Cleveland
wrote:
> Thank you. Does this mean I can implement the index AM and return TIDs
> without having to worry about transactions at all?
Yes. That's the upside of the design -- it makes it easy to add new
transactional index AMs. Which is one reason
On 2021-Jul-19, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> I have a feeling it's getting overly complicated, to the extent that
> it'll be hard to explain to users and reason about. I don't think
> there's a "perfect" solution for cases when the filter expression gives
> different answers for old/new row - it'll
On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 at 17:02, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 2:12 PM Japin Li wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 16 Jul 2021 at 14:06, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 8:20 AM Japin Li wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 08 Jul 2021 at 18:17, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> >> > On Thu, Jul
On 2021-Jul-20, Arne Roland wrote:
> Is your patch based on master? It doesn't apply at my end.
It does ... master being dd498998a3 here,
$ patch -p1 < /tmp/renametrig-8.patch
patching file src/backend/commands/trigger.c
patching file src/backend/parser/gram.y
patching file
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 8:38 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On July 19, 2021 2:40 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > I've attached the updated version patch that incorporated all comments
> > I got so far except for the clearing error details part I mentioned
> > above. After getting a
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 5:47 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 12:10 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 12:02 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > 1. How to clear apply worker errors. IIUC we've discussed that once
> > > the apply worker skipped
> We are referring the trigger via it's name after all. If a child is named
> differently we break with that assumption. I think informing the user about
> that, is very valuable.
To elaborate on that:
While we to similar things for things like set schema, here it has a functional
relevance.
Hi,
I am interested in this feature and took a quick a look at the patch.
Here are a few comments.
(1)
+ appendStringInfo(, "%s", q);
We'd better use appendStringInfoString(, q);
(2)
+ whereclause = transformWhereClause(pstate,
+
I wrote:
> Thomas Munro writes:
>> While I was here again, I couldn't resist trying to extend this to
>> Solaris, since it looked so easy. I don't have access, but I tested
>> on Illumos by undefining O_DIRECT. Thoughts?
> I can try that on the gcc farm in a bit.
Hmm, it compiles cleanly, but
Hi!
From: Alvaro Herrera
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2021 02:03
To: Arne Roland
Cc: vignesh C; Zhihong Yu; Pg Hackers
Subject: Re: Rename of triggers for partitioned tables
I found this coding too convoluted, so I rewrote it in a different way.
You tests pass with this, but I admit I haven't
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 11:32 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> I have a feeling it's getting overly complicated, to the extent that
> it'll be hard to explain to users and reason about. I don't think
> there's a "perfect" solution for cases when the filter expression gives
> different answers for
I found this coding too convoluted, so I rewrote it in a different way.
You tests pass with this, but I admit I haven't double-checked them yet;
I'll do that next.
I don't think we need to give a NOTICE when the trigger name does not
match; it doesn't really matter that the trigger was named
Hi,
On 2021-07-19 16:49:15 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> E.g. for
>
> select prepare(
> 100, -- max block
> 20, -- # of dead tuples per page
> 10, -- dead tuples interval within a page
> 1 -- page inteval
> );
> attach sizeshuffled ordered
> array69 ms 120 MB 84.87 s
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 4:31 PM Chris Cleveland
wrote:
> I'm confused on how to handle transactions and visibility.
In Postgres, indexes are not considered to be part of the logical
database. They're just data structures that point to TIDs in the
table. To an index, each TID is just another
Hi,
On 2021-07-19 15:20:54 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> BTW is the implementation of the radix tree approach available
> somewhere? If so I'd like to experiment with that too.
>
> >
> > I have toyed with implementing adaptively large radix nodes like
> > proposed in
Thomas Munro writes:
> While I was here again, I couldn't resist trying to extend this to
> Solaris, since it looked so easy. I don't have access, but I tested
> on Illumos by undefining O_DIRECT. Thoughts?
I can try that on the gcc farm in a bit.
regards, tom lane
Noob here.
I'm trying to implement a new type of index access method. I don't think I
can use the built-in storage manager and buffer manager efficiently because
files with 8k blocks aren't going to work. I really need to implement a
log-structured file.
I'm confused on how to handle
> On 3 Jul 2021, at 17:00, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
>
> On 12.03.21 08:51, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 11.03.21 11:41, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> .. and apply the padding changes as proposed in a patch upthread like this
>>> (these
>>> work for all OpenSSL versions I've tested, and I'm
On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 2:13 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Hmm ... we used to have to avoid putting #if constructs in the arguments
> of macros (such as StaticAssertStmt). Maybe that's not a thing anymore
> with C99, and in any case this whole stanza is fairly platform-specific
> so we may not run into a
Hi,
There are some places, where strlen can have an overhead.
This patch tries to fix this.
Pass check-world at linux ubuntu (20.04) 64 bits.
regards,
Ranier Vilela
diff --git a/src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c b/src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c
index c14ca27c5e..2036072990 100644
---
Em seg., 19 de jul. de 2021 às 17:56, Andres Freund
escreveu:
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-07-18 19:23:31 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > Sounds great! Thanks for investigating this and for the improvements.
> >
> > It might be good to do some experiments to see how the changes affect
> memory
> >
Hi,
On 2021-07-18 19:23:31 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Sounds great! Thanks for investigating this and for the improvements.
>
> It might be good to do some experiments to see how the changes affect memory
> consumption for practical workloads. I'm willing to spend soem time on that,
> if
Hi,
We have a few routines that are taking up a meaningful share of nearly all
workloads. They are worth micro-optimizing, even though they rarely the most
expensive parts of a profile. The memory allocation infrastructure is an
example of that.
When looking at a profile one can often see that a
On Wed, 2021-06-23 at 15:48 +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Attached is a rebased version which incorporates your recent patchset for
> resource handling, as well as the connect_ok test patch.
With v38 I do see the "one-time function was previously called and
failed" message you mentioned
> On Jul 8, 2021, at 8:56 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> The interesting
> patches in terms of functionality are 0006 and 0007;
The difficulty in v3-0007 with pg_basebackup only knowing how to parse tar
archives seems to be a natural consequence of not sufficiently abstracting out
the handling
I attached the updated patch.
# About pgbench error handling v15
Patches apply cleanly. Compilation, global and local tests ok.
- v15.1: refactoring is a definite improvement.
Good, even if it is not very useful (see below).
While restructuring, maybe predefined variables could be
On Mon, 19 Jul 2021, 09:16 Michael Paquier, wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 12:37:48PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Indeed, good catch. The other commands document that, so let's fix
> > it.
>
> Applied.
Thanks for committing this patch.
Regards,
Vignesh
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 9:43 AM Vladimir Sitnikov <
sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It looks like it is important to have shrx for x86 which appears only
when -march=x86-64-v3 is used (see
https://github.com/golang/go/issues/47120#issuecomment-877629712 ).
> Just in case: I know x86 wound
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 6:02 PM tushar wrote:
>
> On 7/16/21 12:43 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > I think the problem is that bbsink_gzip_end_archive() is not
> > forwarding the end request to the next bbsink. The attached patch so
> > fix it.
>
> Thanks Dilip. Reported issue seems to be fixed now
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 5:44 AM Pavel Luzanov
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I found that the start section of the postgresql.conf file is missing a
> description of two units: bytes (appeared in version 11) and
> microseconds (in version 12).
>
> The attached patch makes these changes to the
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 04:15:36PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>> When rotation happens, the metainfo file is once removed then
>> created. If slurp_file in the metafile-checking loop hits the gap, the
>> slurp_file fails with ENOENT.
> I can read the following
Kyotaro Horiguchi writes:
> When rotation happens, the metainfo file is once removed then
> created. If slurp_file in the metafile-checking loop hits the gap, the
> slurp_file fails with ENOENT.
Oh! Yeah, that's dumb, we should fix it to use rename(). Can't blame
platform's rename() if it's
Thomas Munro writes:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 4:42 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> prairiedog thinks that Assert is too optimistic about whether all
>> those flags exist.
> Fixed.
Hmm ... we used to have to avoid putting #if constructs in the arguments
of macros (such as StaticAssertStmt). Maybe
On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 11:59:49 +0900
Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> Hello,
>
> During reading the documentation of libpq [1] , I found the following
> description:
>
> In the nonblocking state, calls to PQsendQuery, PQputline, PQputnbytes,
> PQputCopyData, and PQendcopy will not block but instead return
Hi Michael,
> Just to make the discussion move on, attached is an updated version
> doing that.
The code seems OK, but I have mixed feelings about the way that the
VIEW currently works.
Here is what I get when a single user is connected via a UNIX socket:
43204 (master) =# select * from
Thank you,
It looks like it is important to have shrx for x86 which appears only when
-march=x86-64-v3 is used (see
https://github.com/golang/go/issues/47120#issuecomment-877629712 ).
Just in case: I know x86 wound not use fallback implementation, however,
the sole purpose of shift-based DFA is
On 7/19/21 1:30 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 8:03 PM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>>
>> On 7/14/21 2:50 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 3:58 PM Tomas Vondra
>>>
>>> I think apart from the above, it might be good if we can find what
>>> some other databases does in
On 7/19/21 1:00 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 3:12 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>> a. Just log it and move to the next row
>> b. send to stats collector some info about this which can be displayed
>> in a view and then move ahead
>> c. just skip it like any other row that doesn't
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 8:18 PM Ibrar Ahmed wrote:
>
> The patch does not apply, and rebase is required.
>
Attached a rebased patch (minor updates to the test code).
Regards,
Greg Nancarrow
Fujitsu Australia
v17-0001-on_client_connect_event_trigger.patch
Description: Binary data
On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 4:36 AM David Rowley wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Jul 2021 at 01:14, James Coleman wrote:
> > The only remaining question I have is whether or not costing needs to
> > change, given the very significant speedup for datum sort.
>
> I'm looking at cost_tuplesort and the only
On 7/16/21 12:43 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote:
I think the problem is that bbsink_gzip_end_archive() is not
forwarding the end request to the next bbsink. The attached patch so
fix it.
Thanks Dilip. Reported issue seems to be fixed now with your patch
[edb@centos7tushar bin]$ ./pg_basebackup
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 12:55 AM Thomas Munro
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 4:42 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > prairiedog thinks that Assert is too optimistic about whether all
> > those flags exist.
>
> Fixed.
>
> (Huh, I received no -committers email for 2dbe8905.)
It didn't show up in the
Hi,
> I agree, I missed this part. The .history file should be given higher
preference.
> I will take care of it in the next patch.
Archiver does not have access to shared memory and the current timeline ID
is not available at archiver. In order to keep track of timeline switch we
have
to push a
On July 19, 2021 2:40 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I've attached the updated version patch that incorporated all comments
> I got so far except for the clearing error details part I mentioned
> above. After getting a consensus on those parts, I'll incorporate the
> idea into the patches.
Hi
On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 4:59 PM Ibrar Ahmed wrote:
>
> Hackers,
>
> The Commitfest 2021-07 is now in progress. It is one of the biggest one.
> Total number of patches of this commitfest is 342.
>
> Needs review: 204.
> Waiting on Author: 40.
> Ready for Committer: 18.
> Committed: 57.
> Moved to
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 12:43 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 5:51 PM tushar wrote:
> >
> > On 7/8/21 9:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > Here at last is a new version.
> > Please refer this scenario ,where backup target using
> > --server-compression is closing the server
> >
On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 8:03 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> On 7/14/21 2:50 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 3:58 PM Tomas Vondra
> >
> > I think apart from the above, it might be good if we can find what
> > some other databases does in this regard?
> >
>
> Yeah, that might tell us
On Mon, 2021-07-19 at 16:46 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > In your opinion, would the current one-line patch proposal make things
> > strictly better than they are today, or would it have mixed results?
> > I'm wondering how to help this patch move forward for the current
> > commitfest, or if
On 7/8/21 9:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Here at last is a new version.
if i try to perform pg_basebackup using "-t server " option against
localhost V/S remote machine ,
i can see difference in backup size.
data directory whose size is
[edb@centos7tushar bin]$ du -sch data/
578M data/
578M
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 3:12 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> a. Just log it and move to the next row
> b. send to stats collector some info about this which can be displayed
> in a view and then move ahead
> c. just skip it like any other row that doesn't match the filter clause.
>
> I am not sure if
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 8:42 PM Konstantin Knizhnik <
k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>
>
> On 11.03.2021 03:47, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > Hi Konstantin,
> >
> > Thanks for working on this! Using extended statistics to improve join
> > cardinality estimates was definitely on my radar, and this
On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 8:05 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
> At Tue, 6 Apr 2021 09:32:16 -0700, Andres Freund
> wrote in
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2021-04-05 02:29:14 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> ..
> > I'm inclined to push patches
> > [PATCH v60 05/17] pgstat: split bgwriter and checkpointer messages.
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 7:44 PM Rahila Syed wrote:
>
> Hi Tomas,
>
> Thank you for your comments.
>
>
>>
>> >
>> > Currently, this capability is not included in the patch. If the table on
>> > the subscriber
>> > server has lesser attributes than that on the publisher server, it
>> > throws an
On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 5:55 AM Greg Nancarrow wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 4, 2021 at 1:21 PM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > CFBot shows the following failure:
> > # poll_query_until timed out executing this query:
> > # SELECT '0/3046250' <= replay_lsn AND state = 'streaming' FROM
> >
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 1:07 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
> Hi Andres,
>
> On 6/22/21 12:38 PM, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> > Hi Andres,
> >
> > On 6/14/21 7:41 AM, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> >> Hi Andres,
> >>
> >> On 4/8/21 5:47 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On 2021-04-07
po 19. 7. 2021 v 9:46 odesílatel Michael Paquier
napsal:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 06:03:34PM +, Jacob Champion wrote:
> > I would guess that's the key issue here. If we choose a particular
> > width for emoji characters, is there anything keeping a terminal's font
> > from doing something
On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 06:32:28 -0300
Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Em seg., 19 de jul. de 2021 às 06:15, Yugo NAGATA
> escreveu:
>
> > On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 17:47:07 +0900 (JST)
> > Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> >
> > > At Mon, 19 Jul 2021 16:00:39 +0900, Yugo NAGATA
> > wrote in
> > > > Your patch
Hello,
I found that the start section of the postgresql.conf file is missing a
description of two units: bytes (appeared in version 11) and
microseconds (in version 12).
The attached patch makes these changes to the postgresql.conf.sample file.
--
Pavel Luzanov
Postgres Professional:
On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 3:05 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2021-Jul-16, Greg Nancarrow wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 3:50 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > I am not so sure about different filters for old and new rows but it
> > > makes sense to by default apply the filter to both old
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 15.07.21 13:12, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
>>
>>> Hi hackers,
>>>
>>> We've had node-casting versions of the list extraction macros since
>>> 2017, but several cases of the written-out version have been
Em seg., 19 de jul. de 2021 às 06:15, Yugo NAGATA
escreveu:
> On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 17:47:07 +0900 (JST)
> Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>
> > At Mon, 19 Jul 2021 16:00:39 +0900, Yugo NAGATA
> wrote in
> > > Your patch doesn't fix the issue that the error message is never
> reported in
> > > standby
On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 17:47:07 +0900 (JST)
Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Mon, 19 Jul 2021 16:00:39 +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote
> in
> > Your patch doesn't fix the issue that the error message is never reported in
> > standby mode. When a WAL page header is broken, the standby would silently
> >
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 8:13 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> Modified.
>
> Thanks for the comments, these issues are fixed as part of the v12 patch
> posted at [1].
> [1] -
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm3V9ny5dJM8nofLGJ3zDuDG0gS2dX%2BAhDph--U5y%2B4VbQ%40mail.gmail.com
>
There seems
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 2:12 PM Japin Li wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 16 Jul 2021 at 14:06, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 8:20 AM Japin Li wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 08 Jul 2021 at 18:17, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 3:43 PM Japin Li wrote:
> >>
> >> Please consider
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 1:00 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 4:41 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > OK. I have implemented this reported [1] potential buffer overrun
> > > using the constraining strlcpy, because the GID limitation of 200
> > > bytes is already mentioned in
me> Howeer, I'm still on the opinion that we don't need to check that
me> while in standby mode.
Of course it's typo of "while not in standby mode".
sorry..
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 12:10 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 12:02 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > 1. How to clear apply worker errors. IIUC we've discussed that once
> > the apply worker skipped the transaction we leave the error entry
> > itself but clear its fields
At Mon, 19 Jul 2021 16:00:39 +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote in
> Your patch doesn't fix the issue that the error message is never reported in
> standby mode. When a WAL page header is broken, the standby would silently
> repeat
> retrying forever.
Ok, I see your point and agree to that.
> I think
On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 8:44 PM David Rowley wrote:
>
> On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 at 22:38, David Rowley wrote:
> > I could do with a 2nd opinion about if we should just adjust the
> > maximum value for the autovacuum_work_mem GUC to 1GB in master.
> >
> > I'm also not sure if since we'd not backpatch
On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 9:15 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 5:35 PM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 7:24 PM Dilip Kumar wrote
> >
> > The patch does not apply on Head anymore, could you rebase and post a
> > patch. I'm changing the status to "Waiting for
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 04:15:36PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> When rotation happens, the metainfo file is once removed then
> created. If slurp_file in the metafile-checking loop hits the gap, the
> slurp_file fails with ENOENT.
I can read the following code, as of
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 06:03:34PM +, Jacob Champion wrote:
> I would guess that's the key issue here. If we choose a particular
> width for emoji characters, is there anything keeping a terminal's font
> from doing something different anyway?
I'd say that we are doing our best in guessing
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 4:41 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 9:19 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 12:43 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 1:55 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Amit Kapila writes:
> > > > > Pushed.
> > > >
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 10:49:23PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Also, there were two redundant checks for multiple SET ACCESS METHOD commands.
> But one of them wasn't hit if the ALTER was setting the current AM due to the
> no-op test.
Yep.
> I think it's better to fail in every case, and not
At Sun, 18 Jul 2021 12:32:20 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote
in
> Hi all,
>
> prairiedog has failed in a way that seems a bit obscure to me:
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=prairiedog=2021-07-18%2000%3A23%3A29
>
> Here are the details of the failure:
> server signaled
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 02:08:57PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> This behavior is rather debatable, and it would be more instinctive to
> me to just skip any business related to the pre-padding if compression
> is enabled, at the cost of one extra callback in WalWriteMethod to
> grab the
On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 15:14:41 +0900 (JST)
Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Hello.
>
> At Sun, 18 Jul 2021 04:55:05 +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote
> in
> > Hello,
> >
> > I found that any corruption of WAL page header found during recovery is
> > never
> > reported in log messages. If wal page header is
On 07.06.21 22:27, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I wrote a script to automatically generate the node support functions
(copy, equal, out, and read, as well as the node tags enum) from the
struct definitions.
The first eight patches are to clean up various inconsistencies to make
parsing or
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 9:19 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 12:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 1:55 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > >
> > > Amit Kapila writes:
> > > > Pushed.
> > >
> > > I think you'd be way better off making the gid fields be "char *"
> > >
On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 12:02 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 5:14 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 8:52 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 11:13 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 1:15
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 2:22 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 8:33 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 5:14 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Sounds good. I'll incorporate this in the next version patch that I'm
> > > planning to submit this week.
> Looks like I did a sloppy job of that. I messed up the condition in
> standard_qp_callback() that sets the ORDER BY aggregate pathkeys so
> that it accidentally set them when there was an unsortable GROUP BY
> clause, as highlighted by the postgres_fdw tests failing. I've now
> added a comment
On 15.07.21 13:12, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
Hi hackers,
We've had node-casting versions of the list extraction macros since
2017, but several cases of the written-out version have been added since
then (even by Tom, who added the
Sorry for the late reply.
On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 11:55 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-07-09 10:17:49 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2021-07-07 20:46:38 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > Currently, the TIDs of dead tuples are stored in an array that is
> > > collectively
Hello.
At Sun, 18 Jul 2021 04:55:05 +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote in
> Hello,
>
> I found that any corruption of WAL page header found during recovery is never
> reported in log messages. If wal page header is broken, it is detected in
> XLogReaderValidatePageHeader called from XLogPageRead, but
On 2021/07/19 11:28, torikoshia wrote:
Agreed. Updated the patch.
Thanks for updating the patch!
+bool
+SendProcSignalForLogInfo(pid_t pid, ProcSignalReason reason)
I don't think that procsignal.c is proper place to check the permission and
check whether the specified PID indicates a
100 matches
Mail list logo
