On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:34:15AM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I noticed that the new Perl test modules are not installed, so if you
> try to use PostgreSQL/Test/Cluster.pm in an external test from pgxs, it
> fails with the modules not being found.
>
> I see no reason for this other than
At Mon, 10 Oct 2022 08:53:55 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote in
> It looks like we have an unnecessary XLogSegNoOffsetToRecPtr() in
> XLogReaderValidatePageHeader(). We pass the start LSN of the WAL page
> and check if it matches with the LSN that was stored in the WAL page
> header
Hi Ankit,
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 9:32 AM Ankit Oza wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> We are looking for an example on how to consume the changes of WAL produced
> by logical decoding (streaming or SQL interface) in another postgres server.
built-in logical replication is good example to start looking
On Sun, Oct 09, 2022 at 02:13:48PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Here you go.
Thanks, applied. It took me a few minutes to note that
regress_regression_* is required in the object names because we need
to use the same name for the parent role and the database, with
"regress_" being required for
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 8:20 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> > AFICS, the aim of the patch isn't optimizing around
> > GetCurrentTimestamp() calls and the patch does seem to change quite a
> > bit of them which may cause a change of the behaviour. I think that
> > the GetCurrentTimestamp()
Hello,
We are looking for an example on how to consume the changes of WAL produced
by logical decoding (streaming or SQL interface) in another postgres server.
Basically, we are trying to create a replica/standby postgre server to a
primary progre server. Between Logical replication and Logical
Dear Önder,
Thanks for updating the patch! I checked yours and almost good.
Followings are just cosmetic comments.
===
01. relation.c - GetCheapestReplicaIdentityFullPath
```
* The reason that the planner would not pick partial indexes and
indexes
* with only expressions
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 8:14 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Peter Smith writes:
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 4:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> I think the below gives accurate information:
> >> WARNING: subscription was created, but is not connected
> >> HINT: You should create the slot manually, enable
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 02:20:37PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 03:23:27PM -0700, Zhihong Yu wrote:
>> I wonder if SAVEPOINT / subtransaction performance has been boosted since the
>> blog was written.
>
> No, I have not seen any changes in this area since then. Seems
Hi Peter,
/* process digits */
+ if (ptr[0] == '0' && (ptr[1] == 'x' || ptr[1] == 'X'))
+ {
+ ptr += 2;
+ while (*ptr && isxdigit((unsigned char) *ptr))
+ {
+ int8 digit = hexlookup[(unsigned char) *ptr];
+
+ if (unlikely(pg_mul_s16_overflow(tmp, 16, )) ||
+ unlikely(pg_sub_s16_overflow(tmp,
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 5:31 AM David Rowley wrote:
>
> The proposed patches in [1] do aim to make additional usages of the
> slab allocator, and I have a feeling that we'll want to fix the
> performance of slab.c before those. Perhaps the Asserts are a better
> option if we're to get the
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:33:57AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 3:17 AM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> I wonder if it would be better to simply remove this extra polling of
>> pg_wal as a prerequisite to your patch. The existing commentary leads me
>> to think there
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 11:52:03AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Okay. So, I have reviewed the whole thing, added a description of all
> the fields of BeginCopyTo() in its top comment, tweaked a few things
> and added in the module an extra NOTICE with the number of processed
> rows. The
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 09:16:47PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> Unless I'm missing something both can be handled using pg_node_attr()
> annotations that already exists?
Indeed, that should work for the locators.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 05:06:39PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Yeah, I named it that way because I figured we might want a test for the
> COPY FROM callback someday.
Okay. So, I have reviewed the whole thing, added a description of all
the fields of BeginCopyTo() in its top comment, tweaked a
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 07:01:26AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:21 PM Nathan Bossart
>> Outside of the code snippet you pointed out,
>> I think WalReceiverMain() has a similar problem. That being said, I'm
>> generally skeptical that this sort of thing is
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 01:48:12PM +0500, Andrey V. Lepikhov wrote:
> Your code almost exactly the same as proposed in [1] as part of 'Fast COPY
> FROM' command. But it seems there are differences.
>
> [1]
>
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:21 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
>
Thanks for the updated patches.
> > 2. With the below change, the time walreceiver spends in
> > XLogWalRcvSendReply() is also included for XLogWalRcvSendHSFeedback
> > right? I think it's a problem given that XLogWalRcvSendReply() can
>
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:10:14AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 10:51:14AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>>> +/* Find the soonest wakeup time, to limit our nap. */
>>> +nextWakeup = INT64_MAX;
>>> +for (int i = 0; i <
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 4:46 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> There is no reason to think that the user will also (say) set the
> autovacuum_freeze_table_age reloption separately (not to be confused
> with the vacuum_freeze_table_age GUC!). We'll usually just work off
> the GUC (I mean why wouldn't
On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 2:00 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 8:47 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 9:04 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I think the root reason for this kind of deadlock problems is the table
> > > structure difference
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 at 06:02, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > On 2022-Oct-10, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> We could, but is it really a useful thing for something fixed 6 years ago?
>
> > Well, for people purposefully installing using older installs of Perl
> > (not me, admittedly),
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 09:01:41AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I like these toy modules, they provide test coverage while acting as a
> template for new developers. I am wondering whether it should have
> something for the copy from callback, actually, as it is named
> "test_copy_callbacks"
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 09:38:59AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> This new callback allows the use of COPY TO's machinery in extensions. A
> couple of generic use-cases are listed upthread [0], and one concrete
> use-case is the aws_s3 extension [1].
FWIW, I understand that the proposal is to
The autovacuum_freeze_max_age reloption exists so that the DBA can
optionally have antiwraparound autovacuums run against a table that
requires more frequent antiwraparound autovacuums. This has problems
because there are actually two types of VACUUM right now (aggressive
and non-aggressive),
Thanks for working on this! Like Lukas, I'm excited to see more
visibility into important parts of the system like this.
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:49 AM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
>
> I've gone ahead and implemented option 1 (commented below).
No strong opinion on 1 versus 2, but I guess at least
David Rowley writes:
> The main reason I brought it up was that only yesterday I was looking
> into fixing the slowness of the Slab allocator. It's currently quite
> far behind the performance of both generation.c and aset.c and it
> would be very nice to bring it up to at least be on-par with
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 at 10:07, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, slab.c hasn't any distinction between large and small chunks,
> so we have to just pick one policy or the other. I'd hoped to get
> away with the more robust runtime test on the basis that slab allocation
> is not used so much that this'd
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 10:45 AM Zhihong Yu wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 2:41 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2022-10-03 12:16:12 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> > I haven't yet run through the whole regression test with an assert enabled
>> > llvm because an assert-enabled llvm is *SLOW*, but it
Hi,
On 2022-10-05 13:07:10 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> 0004: solaris: Check for -Wl,-E directly instead of checking for gnu LD
>
> This allows us to get rid of the nontrivial detection of with_gnu_ld,
> simplifying meson PGXS compatibility. It's also nice to delete libtool.m4.
>
> I
Hi,
On 2022-10-10 08:10:22 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 5:16 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > I have also executed my original test after applying these patches on
> > top of the 56 bit relfilenode patch. So earlier we saw the WAL size
> > increased by 11% (66199.09375 kB to
David Rowley writes:
> Looking at your changes to SlabFree(), I don't really think that
> change is well aligned to the newly proposed policy. My understanding
> of the rationale behind this policy is that large chunks get malloced
> and will be slower anyway, so the elog(ERROR) is less overhead
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 at 08:35, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hearing no comments on that, I decided that a good policy would be
> to use Asserts in the paths dealing with small chunks but test-and-elog
> in the paths dealing with large chunks.
This seems like a good policy. I think it's good to get at least
I wrote:
> What I am mainly wondering about at this point is whether Asserts
> are good enough or we should use actual test-and-elog checks for
> these things.
Hearing no comments on that, I decided that a good policy would be
to use Asserts in the paths dealing with small chunks but
Nathan Bossart writes:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2022 at 05:08:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Something I thought about but forgot to mention in the initial email:
>> is it worth sprinkling these macros with "unlikely()"?
> I don't see why not.
I experimented with that, and found something that
I've gone ahead and implemented option 1 (commented below).
On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 6:23 PM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
>
> v31 failed in CI, so
> I've attached v32 which has a few issues fixed:
> - addressed some compiler warnings I hadn't noticed locally
> - autovac launcher and worker do indeed
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 02:44:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 02:41:06AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> As far as I've understood, the idea is to credit people based on the
> >> time frame in which their patches were committed, not on the branch(es)
>
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 02:41:06AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> As far as I've understood, the idea is to credit people based on the
>> time frame in which their patches were committed, not on the branch(es)
>> that the patches were committed to.
> Is the issue that we are
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 02:41:06AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't wish to object to adding Nakamori-san here, but I feel like we
> need a policy that doesn't require last-minute updates to release notes.
>
> As far as I've understood, the idea is to credit people based on the
> time frame in
On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 03:23:27PM -0700, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> Hi,
> I stumbled over:
>
> https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/09/29/
> why-we-spent-the-last-month-eliminating-postgresql-subtransactions/
>
> I wonder if SAVEPOINT / subtransaction performance has been boosted since the
> blog was
Bonjour Daniel,
Good catch! Thanks for the quick fix!
As usual, what is not tested does not:-(
Attached a tap test to check for the expected behavior with multiple
command \g.
--
Fabien.diff --git a/src/bin/psql/t/001_basic.pl b/src/bin/psql/t/001_basic.pl
index f447845717..c81feadd4e
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 10:51:14AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> +/* Find the soonest wakeup time, to limit our nap. */
>> +nextWakeup = INT64_MAX;
>> +for (int i = 0; i < NUM_WALRCV_WAKEUPS; ++i)
>> +nextWakeup =
>
> This is a bit more complicated than the usual tests, but not
> that much.
> Any opinions on this?
+1
I think that because it is more complicated than usual psql, we may want to
comment on the intention of the tests and some of the less-than-common psql
elements (\set concatenation,
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 03:22:15PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> Some comments on v4-0002:
Thanks for taking a look.
> 1. You might want to use PG_INT64_MAX instead of INT64_MAX for portability?
Yes, I used PG_INT64_MAX in v5.
> 2. With the below change, the time walreceiver spends in
>
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> On 2022-Oct-10, Andres Freund wrote:
>> We could, but is it really a useful thing for something fixed 6 years ago?
> Well, for people purposefully installing using older installs of Perl
> (not me, admittedly), it does seem useful, because you get the benefit
> of
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Only 14 and back have this problem.
Ah, cool. There's no freeze on those branches ...
regards, tom lane
>
>
> The idea is simple -- introduce new "error-safe" calling mode of user
> functions by passing special node through FunctCallInfo.context, in
> which function should write error info and return instead of throwing
> it. Also such functions should manually free resources before
> returning an
On 2022-Oct-10, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-10-10 09:37:38 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2022-10-10 18:33:11 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > On 2022-Oct-10, Andres Freund wrote:
> > >
> > > > Given the age of affected perl instances I suspect there'll not be a
> > > > lot of
> > > >
On 2022-10-10 09:37:38 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-10-10 18:33:11 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2022-Oct-10, Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > > Given the age of affected perl instances I suspect there'll not be a lot
> > > of
> > > developers affected, and the number of warnings is
> One idea would be to add a flag, say report_parallel_vacuum_progress,
> to IndexVacuumInfo struct and expect index AM to check and update the
> parallel index vacuum progress, say every 1GB blocks processed. The
> flag is true only when the leader process is vacuuming an index.
Sorry for the
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 12:41:40PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> IIUC, COPY TO callback helps move a table's data out of postgres
> server. Just wondering, how is it different from existing solutions
> like COPY TO ... PROGRAM/FILE, logical replication, pg_dump etc. that
> can move a table's
Hi,
On 2022-10-10 18:33:11 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2022-Oct-10, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > Given the age of affected perl instances I suspect there'll not be a lot of
> > developers affected, and the number of warnings is reasonably small too.
> > It'd
> > likely hurt more developers
On 2022-Oct-10, Andres Freund wrote:
> Given the age of affected perl instances I suspect there'll not be a lot of
> developers affected, and the number of warnings is reasonably small too. It'd
> likely hurt more developers to not see the warnings locally, given that such
> shadowing often
On 2022-Oct-10, Tom Lane wrote:
> +1, but I suppose you need some adjustment in the meson.build files
> now too.
Oh, right, I forgot ...
> (Also, please wait for the v15 release freeze to lift.)
... and now that I look, it turns out that 15 and master need no
changes: both the Makefile and the
Hi,
On 2022-10-10 12:06:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Scraping the configure logs also shows that only half of the buildfarm
> (exactly 50 out of 100 reporting animals) knows -Wshadow=compatible-local,
> which suggests that we might see more of these if they all did.
I think it's not just newness
David Rowley writes:
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2022 at 13:24, David Rowley wrote:
>> Since I just committed the patch to fix the final warnings, I think we
>> should go ahead and commit the patch you wrote to add
>> -Wshadow=compatible-local to the standard build flags. I don't mind
>> doing this.
>
Maxim Orlov writes:
>> -1. Having to touch all the call sites like this outweighs
>> any claimed advantage: it makes them uglier and it will greatly
>> complicate any back-patching we might have to do in those areas.
> Ok, got it. But what if we change the semantics of these calls to
> xid =
> -1. Having to touch all the call sites like this outweighs
> any claimed advantage: it makes them uglier and it will greatly
> complicate any back-patching we might have to do in those areas.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
Ok, got it. But what if we change the semantics of
Maxim Orlov writes:
> I've notice recent activity to convert macros into inline functions. We
> should make TransactionIdRetreat/Advance functions
> Instead of a macro, should we?
-1. Having to touch all the call sites like this outweighs
any claimed advantage: it makes them uglier and it will
Peter Smith writes:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 4:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>> I think the below gives accurate information:
>> WARNING: subscription was created, but is not connected
>> HINT: You should create the slot manually, enable the subscription,
>> and run %s to initiate replication.
> +1
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> I noticed that the new Perl test modules are not installed, so if you
> try to use PostgreSQL/Test/Cluster.pm in an external test from pgxs, it
> fails with the modules not being found.
> I see no reason for this other than having overseen it in b235d41d9646,
> so I
Hi!
This patch is inspired by [0] and many others.
I've notice recent activity to convert macros into inline functions. We
should make TransactionIdRetreat/Advance functions
Instead of a macro, should we?
I also think about NormalTransactionIdPrecedes and
NormalTransactionIdFollows, but maybe,
Hi,
Thanks for the review!
On 10/1/22 14:12, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
This patch could use some more in-code comments. For example, this
+# get prefix for kerberos executables and try to find them at this path
+sub test_krb5_paths
is not helpful. What does it "get", where does it put it,
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 2:12 PM shiy.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 4:17 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > But, while testing I noticed another different quirk
> >
> > It seems that neither the GRANT nor the REVOKE auto-complete
> > recognises the optional PRIVILEGE keyword
> >
> >
On 16.02.22 11:11, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The remaining patches are material for PG16 at this point, and I will
set the commit fest item to returned with feedback in the meantime.
Time to continue with this.
Attached is a rebased and cleaned up patch for non-decimal integer
literals. (I
Hi,
The PostgreSQL 15 GA will be Oct 13, 2022.
Thanks,
Jonathan
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 5:04 PM Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> > PSA patch v3 to combine the different replication origin name
> > formatting in a single function ReplicationOriginNameForLogicalRep as
> > suggested.
>
> LGTM except for minor issues with the formatting; fixed.
>
Hi
Small patch for $subject, as the other pg_get_XXXdef() functions are
documented
and I was looking for this one but couldn't remember what it was called.
Regards
Ian Barwick
commit 1ab855e72e077abad247cc40619b6fc7f7758983
Author: Ian Barwick
Date: Mon Oct 10 22:32:31 2022 +0900
doc:
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 03:04:57PM +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
>
> On 10/7/22 6:13 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >
> > Probably. One part that may be tricky though is the location of the
> > constants we'd like to make generic, but perhaps this could be handled
> > by using a dedicated
Hi,
On 10/7/22 6:13 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 11:51:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I've been thinking since the beginning of this thread that there
was no coherent, defensible rationale being offered for jumbling
some utility statements and not others.
Yeah. The
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 12:41 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm beginning to question the entire premise here. That is,
> rather than tweaking this message until it's within hailing
> distance of sanity, why do we allow the no-connect case at all?
That sounds pretty nuts to me, because of the pg_dump
On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 at 16:30, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Kyotaro Horiguchi writes:
> > At Tue, 4 Oct 2022 17:15:31 -0700, Nathan Bossart
> > wrote in
> >> On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 07:53:11PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> After further thought, maybe it'd be better to do it as attached,
> >>> with one
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 5:16 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> I have also executed my original test after applying these patches on
> top of the 56 bit relfilenode patch. So earlier we saw the WAL size
> increased by 11% (66199.09375 kB to 73906.984375 kB) and after this
> patch now the WAL generated is
On 2022-Sep-24, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Anton A. Melnikov" writes:
> > [ v4-0001-Fix-logical-replica-assert-on-func-error.patch ]
>
> I took a quick look at this. I think you're solving the
> problem in the wrong place. The real issue is why are
> we not setting up ActivePortal correctly when
Hello
On 2022-Oct-07, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> I found that tag files generated by src/tools/make_ctags
> doesn't include some keywords, that were field names of node
> structs, for example norm_select in RestrictInfo. Such fields
> are defined with pg_node_attr macro that was introduced
> recently,
Hi,
I applied most of suggestions: used separate files for most of added code,
fixed typos/mistakes, got rid of that pesky TODO that was already implemented,
just not deleted.
Added tests (and functionality) for cases when you need to mask columns in
tables with the same name in different
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 11:38 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> I moved as much as I could to 0001 in v4.
Some comments on v4-0002:
1. You might want to use PG_INT64_MAX instead of INT64_MAX for portability?
2. With the below change, the time walreceiver spends in
XLogWalRcvSendReply() is also
I noticed that the new Perl test modules are not installed, so if you
try to use PostgreSQL/Test/Cluster.pm in an external test from pgxs, it
fails with the modules not being found.
I see no reason for this other than having overseen it in b235d41d9646,
so I propose the attached (for all
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 4:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 10:10 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Amit Kapila writes:
...
> The docs say [1]: "When creating a subscription, the remote host is
> not reachable or in an unclear state. In that case, the subscription
> can be created
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 5:19 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> I light dusted off my old varint implementation from [1] and converted the
> RelFileLocator and BlockNumber from fixed width integers to varint ones. This
> isn't meant as a serious patch, but an experiment to see if this is a path
> worth
On 04.10.22 10:15, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I wanted to propose the attached patch to get rid of the custom pgpid_t
typedef in pg_ctl. Since we liberally use pid_t elsewhere, this seemed
plausible.
However, this patch fails the CompilerWarnings job on Cirrus, because
apparently under mingw,
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 16:18, John Naylor wrote:
> Interestingly, I did find that in C, some statement is needed after a
> label, even an empty one, otherwise it won't compile.
Yeah, this is required by ISO C [1].
> That's not the case here, though, so pushed.
Thank you!
[1]
On Sun, Oct 9, 2022 at 10:08 AM Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2022 at 07:42:58AM +0800, Japin Li wrote:
> >
> > Hi hackers,
> >
> > I find there are some unnecessary commas for goto lables,
> > attached a patch to remove them.
>
> You mean semi-colon? +1, and a quick regex
On 05.10.22 20:57, Nathan Bossart wrote:
On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 07:55:58PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Leaving archive_command empty is an intentional configuration choice.
What we are talking about here is, arguably, a misconfiguration, so it
should result in an error.
Okay. What do
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 12:20 PM bt22nakamorit
wrote:
>
> 2022-10-10 12:27 Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > if (port->database_name != NULL && port->database_name[0] != '\0')
> > appendStringInfo(_data, "%s ", port->database_name);
> >
> > The above works better.
>
> Thank you for the suggestion.
On Sun, Oct 9, 2022 at 2:44 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> Sorry for the noise. There was an extra #include in v4 that I've removed
> in v5.
IIUC, COPY TO callback helps move a table's data out of postgres
server. Just wondering, how is it different from existing solutions
like COPY TO ...
Hi,
On 10/6/22 2:53 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 03:32:20PM +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
On 10/5/22 9:24 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
- test_role() -> test_conn() to be able to pass down a database name.
- reset_pg_hba() to control the host, db and user parts. The host
Hi,
On 10/5/22 9:24 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 01:33:09PM +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
Anyway, I have looked at the patch.
+ List *roles_re;
+ List *databases_re;
+ regex_thostname_re;
I am surprised by the approach of using separate lists for
2022-10-10 12:27 Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
if (port->database_name != NULL && port->database_name[0] != '\0')
appendStringInfo(_data, "%s ", port->database_name);
The above works better.
Thank you for the suggestion.
I have edited the patch to reflect your idea.
Best,
Tatsuhiro
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 06.10.22 18:26, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> I'd propose to add "Tatsuhiro Nakamori" whose patch was back-patched to
>> v15 last week, into the list. Thought?
> They were added with the last update.
I don't wish to object to adding Nakamori-san here, but I feel like we
On 06.10.22 18:26, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2022/09/08 21:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Attached is the plain-text list of acknowledgments for the PG15
release notes, current through REL_15_BETA4. Please check for
problems such as wrong sorting, duplicate names in different variants,
or names in
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 4:17 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 12:50 PM shiy.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 1:49 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote:
> > >
> > > At Wed, 28 Sep 2022 14:14:01 +1000, Peter Smith
> > > wrote in
> ...
> > > >
> > > > 2. tab complete
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 3:17 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> > Instead, the simplest would be to just pass XLOG_FROM_WAL to
> > XLogFileReadAnyTLI() when we're about to switch the source to stream
> > mode. This doesn't change the existing behaviour.
>
> It might be more consistent with existing
93 matches
Mail list logo
