On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 09:58:31AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Okay, let's wait for two or three days and see if anyone thinks
> differently, otherwise, I'll push v3 after a bit more testing.
No objections from here if you want to go ahead with v3 and print the
full set of subxids on top of the
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 23:05 PM Osumi, Takamichi/大墨 昂道
wrote:
> Hi, thank you for the updated patches!
>
>
> Here are my minor review comments for HEAD v12.
Thanks for your comments.
> (1) typo & suggestion to reword one comment
>
>
> +* Publications support
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 01:46:39PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> As the code written, when archive library is being added while archive
> command is already set, archiver first emits seemingly positive
> message "restarting archive process because of..", then errors out
> after the resatart
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 11:08 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> Hi Wang-san. Here are my review comments for HEAD_v12-0001 patch.
Thanks for your comments.
> ==
>
> 1. Missing documentation.
>
> In [1] you wrote:
> > I think the behaviour of multiple publications with parameter
>
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 02:30:52PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Mon, 17 Oct 2022 13:51:52 +0900, Michael Paquier
> wrote in
>> I am not sure to understand what you mean here. The shutdown callback
>> is available once the archiver process has loaded the library defined
>> in
At Sun, 16 Oct 2022 13:39:14 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote in
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 3:43 AM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi hackers,
> >
> > Presently, when an archive module sets up a shutdown callback, it will be
> > called upon ERROR/FATAL (via PG_ENSURE_ERROR_CLEANUP), when the
At Mon, 17 Oct 2022 13:51:52 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote
in
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 01:39:14PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > Is the shutdown callback meant to be called only after the archive
> > library is loaded? The documentation [1] says that it just gets called
> > before the
On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 10:29 AM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
> I think that it makes sense to count both the initial buffers added to
> the ring and subsequent shared buffers added to the ring (either when
> the current strategy buffer is pinned or in use or when a bulkread
> rejects dirty strategy
On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 01:39:14PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> Is the shutdown callback meant to be called only after the archive
> library is loaded? The documentation [1] says that it just gets called
> before the archiver process exits. If this is true, can we just place
>
At Fri, 14 Oct 2022 14:42:56 -0700, Nathan Bossart
wrote in
> As promised...
As the code written, when archive library is being added while archive
command is already set, archiver first emits seemingly positive
message "restarting archive process because of..", then errors out
after the
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 6:46 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Sun, 16 Oct 2022 12:32:56 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote in
> > On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 4:58 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > > I spent some time today reading this. As others said upthread, the
> > > > output can be more
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 8:39 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> While working on some logical replication related features.
> I found the HINT message could be improved when I tried to add a publication
> to
> a subscription which was disabled.
>
> alter subscription sub add publication pub2;
On 10/16/22 22:17, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> First of all, it's really great to see that this is being worked on.
>
> On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 at 16:34, Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>> Try to formulate the whole algorithm. Maybe I'm missing something.
>>
>> The current algorithm is something like this:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 07:41:32AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> > I fixed the commit message of 0001 patch. Fixed shadowed variables too.
Thanks!
> >
> > There is a partially open issue, where I and Julien are not sure about a
> > solution, and we would like to ask for the community's
Hi,
While working on some logical replication related features.
I found the HINT message could be improved when I tried to add a publication to
a subscription which was disabled.
alter subscription sub add publication pub2;
--
ERROR: ALTER SUBSCRIPTION with refresh is not allowed for disabled
On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 6:27 PM kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> Thanks for giving many comments! Based on off and on discussions, I modified
> my patch.
Here are my other quick review comments on v16.
(1) v16-0001 : definition of a new structure
CheckingRemoteServersCallbackItem can
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 10:35 AM Richard Guo wrote:
> As we know when we pull up a simple subquery, if the subquery is within
> the nullable side of an outer join, lateral references to non-nullable
> items may have to be turned into PlaceHolderVars. I happened to wonder
> what should we do
On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 02:10:26PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 10:19:05AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>> Can you please help me understand how name collisions can happen with
>> temp file names including WAL file name, timestamp to millisecond
>> scale, and PID?
On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 04:36:36PM -0500, David Christensen wrote:
> Enclosed is a trivial fix for a typo and misnamed field I noted when doing
> some code review.
(Few days after the fact)
Thanks. There was a second location where delayChkpt was still
mentioned, so fixed also that while on it.
On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 07:54:30AM +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> Right. Giving a second thought to the non matching case, I think I'd prefer
> to concatenate the system_user to the system_user instead. This is what v2
> does.
Fine by me, so applied v2. Thanks!
--
Michael
signature.asc
On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 10:43 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Richard Guo writes:
> > Or maybe we can make it even earlier, when we expand an RTE for a
> > partitioned table and add result tables to leaf_result_relids.
>
> I'm not really on board with injecting command-type-specific logic into
>
On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 12:14 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 8:22 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 9:07 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> > >
...
> > PSA a patch for adding examples of how to activate a subscription that
> > was originally created in a disconnected
Hi,
On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 6:27 PM kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> Thanks for giving many comments! Based on off and on discussions, I modified
> my patch.
Thank you for your patch set !
While reviewing and testing the new v16, I've met a possible issue
by slightly adjusting the
On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 4:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 11:18 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > Summarizing this issue, the assertion check in AssertTXNLsnOrder()
> > fails as reported because the current logical decoding cannot properly
> > handle the case where the
At Sun, 16 Oct 2022 12:32:56 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote in
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 4:58 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > > I spent some time today reading this. As others said upthread, the
> > > output can be more verbose if all the backends are running max
> > > subtransactions or
On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 03:09:14PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-10-15 11:41:08 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> -/* flag bits for SetSingleFuncCall() */
>> -#define SRF_SINGLE_USE_EXPECTED 0x01/* use expectedDesc as tupdesc
>> */
>> -#define SRF_SINGLE_BLESS0x02/*
On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 03:04:43PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Yes - it'd introduce an ABI break, i.e. an already compiled extension
> referencing SetSingleFuncCall() wouldn't fail to load into an upgraded sever,
> due to the reference to the SetSingleFuncCall, which wouldn't exist anymore.
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2022-10-16 16:45:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> What I *am* seeing, in the 9.5 and 9.6 branches, is a ton of
>>
>> ld: warning: -undefined dynamic_lookup may not work with chained fixups
>>
>> apparently because we are specifying -Wl,-undefined,dynamic_lookup
>> which
Hi,
On 2022-10-15 11:41:08 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Attached is a patch for HEAD and REL_15_STABLE to switch this stuff with new
> names, with what's needed for ABI compatibility. My plan would be to keep
> the compatibility parts only in 15, and drop them from HEAD. -- Michael
Looks
Hi,
On 2022-10-16 13:22:41 -0700, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 7:41 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> - * SetSingleFuncCall
> + * Compatibility function for v15.
> + */
> +void
> +SetSingleFuncCall(FunctionCallInfo fcinfo, bits32 flags)
> +{
> + InitMaterializedSRF(fcinfo, flags);
Hi,
On 2022-10-16 16:45:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I think the correct, future-proof fix is to s/REF/REF_P/ in the
> > grammar.
>
> Done like that, after which I found that the pre-v12 branches are
> compiling perfectly warning-free with the 13.0 SDK, despite nothing
> having been
I wrote:
> I think the correct, future-proof fix is to s/REF/REF_P/ in the
> grammar.
Done like that, after which I found that the pre-v12 branches are
compiling perfectly warning-free with the 13.0 SDK, despite nothing
having been done about sprintf. This confused me mightily, but
after digging
On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 7:41 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 05:09:46PM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > To summarize, I am in support of renaming SetSingleFuncCall() ->
> > InitMaterializedSRF() and SRF_SINGLE_USE_EXPECTED ->
> > MAT_SRF_USE_EXPECTED_TUPLE_DESC (or just
First of all, it's really great to see that this is being worked on.
On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 at 16:34, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> Try to formulate the whole algorithm. Maybe I'm missing something.
>
> The current algorithm is something like this:
>
> 1. request info about ranges from the BRIN opclass
>
On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 at 16:42, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> It also seems kind of unfair to decide
> that the relevant comparison point is a seqscan rather than a
> btree indexscan.
I think the comparison against full table scan seems appropriate, as
the benefit of BRIN is less space usage when compared
I wrote:
> So I pushed (1), but on the way to testing (2), I discovered a totally
> independent problem with the 13.0 SDK in older branches:
> In file included from ../../../src/include/postgres.h:46:
> In file included from ../../../src/include/c.h:1387:
> In file included from
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2022-10-15 21:00:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> After further thought, I think the best compromise is just that:
>>
>> (1) apply s/sprintf/snprintf/ patch in branches back to v12, where
>> we began to require C99.
>>
>> (2) in v11 and back to 9.2, enable -Wno-deprecated
Greetings,
* Nathan Bossart (nathandboss...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 04:34:32PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > That thread has not reached an entirely satisfying conclusion.
> > However, the behavior that was deemed outright buggy over there has
> > been fixed. The remaining
Greetings,
* Nathan Bossart (nathandboss...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 08, 2022 at 11:46:50AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Now there may be some other scenario in which the patch is going in
> > exactly the right direction, and if I knew what it was, maybe I'd
> > agree that the patch was a
On 10/16/22 16:42, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> ...
>
> I don't have good answer w.r.t. splitting the page range [0,127] now.
> Let me think more about it.
>
Sure, no problem.
> The 10 step flow (subject to changes down the road) should be either
> given in the description of the patch or, written as
On 10/16/22 16:41, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra writes:
>> I forgot to mention one important issue in my list yesterday, and that's
>> memory consumption.
>
> TBH, this is all looking like vastly more complexity than benefit.
> It's going to be impossible to produce a reliable cost estimate
On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 7:33 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
>
> On 10/16/22 16:01, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 6:51 AM Tomas Vondra
> > mailto:tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > On 10/15/22 14:33, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > ...
>
Tomas Vondra writes:
> I forgot to mention one important issue in my list yesterday, and that's
> memory consumption.
TBH, this is all looking like vastly more complexity than benefit.
It's going to be impossible to produce a reliable cost estimate
given all the uncertainty, and I fear that will
On 10/16/22 16:01, Zhihong Yu wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 6:51 AM Tomas Vondra
> mailto:tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com>>
> wrote:
>
> On 10/15/22 14:33, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > ...
> >
> > There's a bunch of issues with this initial version of the
On 10/16/22 03:36, Zhihong Yu wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 8:23 AM Tomas Vondra
> mailto:tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com>>
> wrote:
>
> On 10/15/22 15:46, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> >...
> > 8) Parallel version is not supported, but I think it shouldn't be
> >
On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 6:51 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> On 10/15/22 14:33, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > ...
> >
> > There's a bunch of issues with this initial version of the patch,
> > usually described in XXX comments in the relevant places.6)
> >
> > ...
>
> I forgot to mention one
On 10/15/22 14:33, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ...
>
> There's a bunch of issues with this initial version of the patch,
> usually described in XXX comments in the relevant places.6)
>
> ...
I forgot to mention one important issue in my list yesterday, and that's
memory consumption. The way
On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 3:43 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> Hi hackers,
>
> Presently, when an archive module sets up a shutdown callback, it will be
> called upon ERROR/FATAL (via PG_ENSURE_ERROR_CLEANUP), when the archive
> library changes (via HandlePgArchInterrupts()), and upon normal shutdown.
On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 3:13 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 11:51:30AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 12:10:18PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> >> 2) I think we have a problem - set archive_mode and archive_library
> >> and start the server, then
On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 4:58 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > I spent some time today reading this. As others said upthread, the
> > output can be more verbose if all the backends are running max
> > subtransactions or subtransactions overflow occurred in all the
> > backends.
> >
>
> As far as I can
50 matches
Mail list logo
