On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 2:34 PM Simon Riggs
wrote:
>
> Reposting v6 now so that patch tester doesn't think this has failed
> when the patch on other thread gets applied.
Intention of the patch, that is, to get rid of promote_trigger_file
GUC sometime in future, looks good to me. However, the
Hello everyone.
> However ... I tried to reproduce the original complaint, and
> failed entirely. I do see KnownAssignedXidsGetAndSetXmin
> eating a bit of time in the standby backends, but it's under 1%
> and doesn't seem to be rising over time. Perhaps we've already
> applied some
Em qua., 16 de nov. de 2022 às 04:23, Michael Paquier
escreveu:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 06:58:01AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > This one has been left out on purpose. I was tempting to use
> > WithInfo() with a CatalogIndexState opened optionally but I got the
> > impression that it
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 at 11:17, Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:47 AM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 24 Oct 2022 at 13:15, Peter Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi hackers.
> > >
> > > There is a docs Logical Replication section "31.10 Configuration
> > > Settings" [1] which
On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 08:19, Andres Freund wrote:
> We already rely on memory context returning MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF aligned
> allocations. Adding the special case, I think, means that the we could safely
> over-allocate by "only"
> alignto + sizeof(MemoryChunk) - MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF
>
> Which would be
On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 15:33:37 -0500
Tom Lane wrote:
> Yugo NAGATA writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Hmm. Maybe the right way to think about this is "if we have completed an
> >> EXECUTE, and not yet received a following SYNC, then report that we are in
> >> a transaction block"? But I'm not
Hi All,
Functions like lappend_*() in list.c do not modify the second
argument. So it can be qualified as const. Any reason why we don't do
that? Is it because the target pointer ptr_value is not const
qualified?
In my code, I am using lappend() and passing it the output of
pq_getmsgstring()
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 1:35 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 4:27 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
> wrote:
> > Please find attached a rebase in v7.
>
> I don't think it's a good thing that this patch is using the
> progress-reporting machinery. The point of that machinery is that we
> want
On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 7:34 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 4:17 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Perhaps this would better be tackled by a new "visibility" view. It could
> > show
> > - number of sessions with a snapshot
> > - max age of backend xmin
> > - pid with max backend
On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 09:34, Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
>
> 2022年11月7日(月) 22:39 vignesh C :
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 at 08:19, Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > cfbot reports the patch no longer applies [1]. As CommitFest 2022-11 is
> > > currently underway, this would
Hi hackers,
> Dilip Kumar asked a good question in the thread about the 0001..0003
> subset [1]. I would like to duplicate it here to make sure it was not
> missed by mistake:
>
> """
> Have we measured the WAL overhead because of this patch set? maybe
> these particular patches will not impact
On 16.11.22 00:40, Andres Freund wrote:
Somewhat relatedly, I wonder if we should have a better way to enable/disable
the 'pgsql' path logic. It's pretty annoying that prefix basically doesn't
work if it doesn't contain 'pgsql' or 'postgres'.
Could you explain this in more detail?
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 1:58 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 2:50 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2022-11-15 11:36:21 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 5:02 PM Andres Freund
> wrote:
> > > > It seems like we should do a bit more validation within a chain of
On 16.11.22 01:01, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 12:08:56AM +0100, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
As mentioned here [1] it might be interesting to complete the returned
information by version() when compiled with meson by including the
host_system.
The meson build
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 2:28 PM Simon Riggs
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 06:47, Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 10:55 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 8:33 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> > > wrote:
> > > > Please review the v2 patch.
> > >
> > >
> On 16 Nov 2022, at 02:02, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 11:09:54AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 15 Nov 2022, at 00:58, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> It looks like there is a second one in install-windows.sgml.
>>
>> Not sure I follow. IPC::Run is already linked to
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 1:20 AM David Christensen
wrote:
>
> Enclosed is v9.
>
> - code style consistency (FPI instead of FPW) internally.
> - cleanup of no-longer needed checksum-related pieces from code and tests.
> - test cleanup/simplification.
> - other comment cleanup.
>
> Passes all CI
On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 23:07, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 21:28, Thomas Munro wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 5:52 AM Simon Riggs
> > wrote:
> > > The attached patch is a reduced version of the original. It covers only:
> > > * deprecation of the promote_trigger_file -
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 0:56 AM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > Attach new patches.
>
Thanks for your comments.
> Here we are having tables list to store the relids and table_infos
> list which stores pubid along with relid. Here tables list acts as a
> temporary list to get filter_partitions and
On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 06:47, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 10:55 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 8:33 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> > wrote:
> > > Please review the v2 patch.
> >
> > It seems to me that this will call disable_startup_progress_timeout
> >
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 7:30 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2022-11-15 16:20:00 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 8:08 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > nor do we enforce in an obvious place that we
> > > don't already hold a snapshot.
> > >
> >
> > We have a check for
Hi Hackers,
This is Myo Wai Thant.
I found out that there is a mistake written in executor/README file.
The actions of MERGE command can be specified as follows: INSERT, UPDATE,
DELETE and DO NOTHING.
However, in the README file, the ‘UPDATE’ word is described 2 times instead of
‘DELETE’.
On 16.11.22 04:31, Ted Yu wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 11:15, Ted Yu mailto:yuzhih...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 7:12 PM Japin Li mailto:japi...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
>> After some rethinking, I find the origin code do not have problems.
>>
>> If fd is
On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 12:54 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 05:17:32PM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> > I re-tested and confirm that the patch does indeed fix the quirk I'd
> > previously reported.
> >
> > But, looking at the patch code, I don't know if it is the best way to
>
101 - 124 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
