On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 10:27:29PM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Here is a work-in-progress patch set for adjusting the archive modules
> interface. Is this roughly what you had in mind?
I have been catching up with what is happening here. I can get
behind the idea to use the term "callbacks"
One open issue (IMO) with the meson build system is that it installs the
test modules under src/test/modules/ as part of a normal installation.
This is because there is no way to set up up the build system to install
extra things only when told. I think we still need a way to disable
this
On Monday, January 30, 2023 2:32 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 9:20 AM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 at 11:26, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > One thing that looks a bit odd is that we will anyway have a similar
> > > check in replorigin_drop_guts() which is a
Gurjeet Singh writes:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 10:44 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> I looked over the v5 patch very briefly, and have two main
>> complaints:
>> ...
> Please see attached v6 of the patch.
Thanks for updating that!
> I'm not sure of the convention around authorship. But since this was
On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 10:44 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> However, what it shouldn't be is part of this patch. It's worth
> pushing it separately to have a record of that decision. I've
> now done that, so you'll need to rebase to remove that delta.
>
> I looked over the v5 patch very briefly, and
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 8:36 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Zheng Li writes:
> > The behavior is due to the following code
> > https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blob/master/src/backend/commands/define.c#L113
>
> Yeah, so you can grep for places that have this behavior by looking
> for defGetBoolean
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 1:08 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 12:39 PM John Naylor
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 1:17 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 6:00 PM John Naylor
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Attached is a rebase to fix conflicts
At Mon, 30 Jan 2023 11:56:33 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote
in
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 9:43 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote:
> >
> > At Mon, 30 Jan 2023 08:51:05 +0530, Amit Kapila
> > wrote in
> > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 8:32 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > At Sat, 28 Jan 2023
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:36 AM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 11:37 AM Shi, Yu/侍 雨 wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 3:41 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
>
> Yes, I think you are right.
> Fixed this problem.
>
+ /*
+ * Trying to send keepalive message after every
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 9:20 AM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 at 11:26, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > One thing that looks a bit odd is that we will anyway have a similar
> > check in replorigin_drop_guts() which is a static function and called
> > from only one place, so, will it be
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 9:43 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Mon, 30 Jan 2023 08:51:05 +0530, Amit Kapila
> wrote in
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 8:32 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > At Sat, 28 Jan 2023 04:28:29 +, "Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)"
> > > wrote in
> > > > On
On Thursday, January 26, 2023 11:37 AM Kuroda, Hayato/黒田 隼人
wrote:
>
> Followings are comments.
Thanks for the comments.
> In this test the rollback-prepared seems not to be executed. This is because
> serializations are finished while handling PREPARE message and the final
> state of
On Monday, January 30, 2023 12:13 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Here are my review comments for v88-0002.
Thanks for your comments.
>
> ==
> General
>
> 1.
> The test cases are checking the log content but they are not checking for
> debug logs or untranslated elogs -- they are expecting a
On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 11:57 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 10:46:34AM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> >
> > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/So,_you_want_to_be_a_developer%3F#TODOs
> > to:
> > "It's worth checking if the feature of interest is found in the TODO
list on
> >
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 10:30 PM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
>
> On 19.01.23 00:45, Peter Smith wrote:
> > The original $SUBJECT requirements evolved to also try to make each
> > view appear on a separate page after that was suggested by DavidJ [2].
> > I was unable to achieve per-page views "without
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 5:40 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Patch v88-0001 LGTM.
>
Pushed.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:27 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 9:15 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 11:54 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Amit, Sawada-san,
> > >
> > > I have also reproduced the failure on PG15 with some debug
On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 12:02:23AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> My thoughts were trending in that direction too. It's starting
> to sound like we aren't going to be able to make a fix that
> we'd be willing to risk back-patching, even if it were completely
> compatible at the user level.
>
> Still,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 10:45 PM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 8:42 AM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 8:29 AM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 08:14:10AM -0800, SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM wrote:
>>> > 2.
Hi,
On 2023-01-30 15:22:34 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 6:26 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> > out-of-order hazard
>
> I've been trying to understand how that could happen, but my CPU-fu is
> weak. Let me try to write an argument for why it can't happen, so
> that later I can
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 7:05 PM Ankit Kumar Pandey
wrote:
>
>
> > On 26/01/23 07:40, David Rowley wrote:
> > Sorting in smaller batches that better fit into CPU cache.
>
> More reading yielded that we are looking for cache-oblivious
> sorting algorithm.
Since David referred to L3 size as the
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 11:37 AM Shi, Yu/侍 雨 wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 3:41 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > I tested a mix transaction of transactional and non-transactional messages
> > on
> > the current HEAD and reproduced the timeout problem. I think this result is
> OK.
> >
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 01:05:07PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I kind of think this is a lot of unnecessary work. The case that is
> problematic is a GUC that's marked GUC_NO_SHOW_ALL but not marked
> GUC_NOT_IN_SAMPLE. There aren't any of those, and I don't think there
> are likely to be any in
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 9:15 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 11:54 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Amit, Sawada-san,
> >
> > I have also reproduced the failure on PG15 with some debug log, and I
> > agreed that
> > somebody changed
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 9:50 PM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 8:33 PM John Naylor
> wrote:
> > The first implementation should be simple, easy to test/verify, easy to
understand, and easy to replace. As much as possible anyway.
>
> Yes, but if a concurrent writer waits for
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 17:46, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 3:45 PM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 at 10:52, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > IIRC, this is done to prevent concurrent drops of origin drop say by
> > > exposed API pg_replication_origin_drop(). See the
At Mon, 30 Jan 2023 08:51:05 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote
in
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 8:32 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote:
> >
> > At Sat, 28 Jan 2023 04:28:29 +, "Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)"
> > wrote in
> > > On Friday, January 27, 2023 8:00 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > > So, you have
Here are my review comments for v88-0002.
==
General
1.
The test cases are checking the log content but they are not checking
for debug logs or untranslated elogs -- they are expecting a normal
ereport LOG that might be translated. I’m not sure if that is OK, or
if it is a potential problem.
On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 12:39 PM John Naylor
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 1:17 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 6:00 PM John Naylor
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Attached is a rebase to fix conflicts from recent commits.
> >
> > I have reviewed v22-0022* patch and I have
On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 at 11:26, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 9:36 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Friday, January 27, 2023 8:16 PM Amit Kapila
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 3:45 PM vignesh C wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 at 10:52, Amit Kapila
>
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 3:41 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> I tested a mix transaction of transactional and non-transactional messages on
> the current HEAD and reproduced the timeout problem. I think this result is
> OK.
> Because when decoding a transaction, non-transactional changes are
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 8:32 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Sat, 28 Jan 2023 04:28:29 +, "Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)"
> wrote in
> > On Friday, January 27, 2023 8:00 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > > So, you have changed min_apply_delay from int64 to int32, but you haven't
> > >
At Sat, 28 Jan 2023 04:28:29 +, "Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)"
wrote in
> On Friday, January 27, 2023 8:00 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > So, you have changed min_apply_delay from int64 to int32, but you haven't
> > mentioned the reason for the same? We use 'int' for the similar parameter
> >
On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 at 23:06, vignesh C wrote:
> patching file src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c
> Hunk #1 FAILED at 451.
> 1 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
> src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c.rej
I've moved this patch to the next CF. This patch has a dependency on
what's being
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 6:26 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> out-of-order hazard
I've been trying to understand how that could happen, but my CPU-fu is
weak. Let me try to write an argument for why it can't happen, so
that later I can look back at how stupid and naive I was. We have A
B, and if the
Patch v88-0001 LGTM.
Below are just some minor review comments about the commit message.
==
Commit message
1.
We have discussed having this parameter as a subscription option but
exposing a parameter that is primarily used for testing/debugging to users
didn't seem advisable and there is no
Zheng Li writes:
> The behavior is due to the following code
> https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blob/master/src/backend/commands/define.c#L113
Yeah, so you can grep for places that have this behavior by looking
for defGetBoolean calls ... and there are quite a few. That leads
me to the
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 7:08 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> However, the other lockup I saw was when using serial_schedule, so I
> guess lower concurrency makes it more likely.
FWIW "psql db -f src/test/regress/sql/join_hash.sql | cat" also works
(I mean, it's self-contained and doesn't need anything
On 1/29/23 18:53, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2023-01-29 18:39:05 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Will do, but I'll wait for another lockup to see how frequent it
>> actually is. I'm now at ~90 runs total, and it didn't happen again yet.
>> So hitting it after 15 runs might have been a bit
Justin Pryzby writes:
> SELECT pg_show_all_settings() ought to keep working when called with no
> parameter. Tom gave me a hint how to do that for system catalogs here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/17988.1584472...@sss.pgh.pa.us
> In this case, it might be cleaner to add a second
Hi,
On 2023-01-29 18:39:05 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Will do, but I'll wait for another lockup to see how frequent it
> actually is. I'm now at ~90 runs total, and it didn't happen again yet.
> So hitting it after 15 runs might have been a bit of a luck.
Was there a difference in how much
Hi,
On 2023-01-30 06:26:02 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 1:53 AM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
> > So I did that - same configure options as the buildfarm client, and a
> > 'make check' (with only tests up to the 'join' suite, because that's
> > where it got stuck before). And it
On 1/29/23 18:26, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 1:53 AM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>> So I did that - same configure options as the buildfarm client, and a
>> 'make check' (with only tests up to the 'join' suite, because that's
>> where it got stuck before). And it took only ~15
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 1:53 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> So I did that - same configure options as the buildfarm client, and a
> 'make check' (with only tests up to the 'join' suite, because that's
> where it got stuck before). And it took only ~15 runs (~1h) to hit this
> again on dikkop.
That's
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 05:22:13PM +0530, Nitin Jadhav wrote:
> > We could extend pg_show_all_settings() with a boolean parameter to
> > enforce listing all the parameters, even the ones that are marked as
> > NOSHOW, but this does not count on GetConfigOptionValues() that could
> > force a
On Sun, 22 Jan 2023 at 22:00, vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Sun, 15 Jan 2023 at 23:02, vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 8 Jan 2023 at 21:00, vignesh C wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 at 13:13, vignesh C wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > Just a reminder that Commitfest 2023-01 has
Dean Rasheed writes:
> I spent a little time investigating bug #17759 [1] in more detail.
> Initially, I thought that it had been fixed by 3f7836ff65, but it
> turns out that's not the case.
Thanks for looking closer! I had felt a little unsure about that
too, but hadn't gotten to poking into
On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 11:54 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> Dear Amit, Sawada-san,
>
> I have also reproduced the failure on PG15 with some debug log, and I agreed
> that
> somebody changed procArray->replication_slot_xmin to InvalidTransactionId.
>
> > > The same assertion failure has
On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 8:33 PM John Naylor
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 3:33 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 3:54 PM John Naylor
> > wrote:
>
> > I think that we need to prevent concurrent updates (RT_SET() and
> > RT_DELETE()) during the iteration to get the
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 09:56:02AM -0300, Marcos Pegoraro wrote:
> Em dom., 29 de jan. de 2023 às 09:24, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>
> escreveu:
>
> > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 08:15:29PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > > The patch does not apply on top of HEAD as in [1], please post a
On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 at 22:14, Joel Jacobson wrote:
>
> I found what appears to be a small harmless error in numeric.c,
> that seems worthwhile to fix only because it's currently causes confusion.
>
Shrug. Looking at git blame, it's been like that for about 20 years,
and I wasn't aware of it
On 27.01.23 21:13, Cary Huang wrote:
I agree that it is a more elegant approach to add
"sslcertmode=disable" on the client side to prevent sending default
certificate.
But, if the server does request clientcert but client uses
"sslcertmode=disable" to connect and not give a certificate, it
Em dom., 29 de jan. de 2023 às 09:24, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>
escreveu:
> > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 08:15:29PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > The patch does not apply on top of HEAD as in [1], please post a rebased
> patch:
>
> Thanks. I think this one should do the trick.
>
There is
On 1/28/23 13:05, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> FWIW I'll wait for dikkop to finish the current buildfarm run (it's
> currently chewing on HEAD) and then will try to do runs of the 'joins'
> test in a loop. That's where dikkop got stuck before.
>
So I did that - same configure options as the buildfarm
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 08:15:29PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> The patch does not apply on top of HEAD as in [1], please post a rebased
> patch:
Thanks. I think this one should do the trick.
>From 3c51561ddaecdbc82842fae4fab74cc33526f17c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dmitrii Dolgov
> We could extend pg_show_all_settings() with a boolean parameter to
> enforce listing all the parameters, even the ones that are marked as
> NOSHOW, but this does not count on GetConfigOptionValues() that could
> force a parameter to become noshow on a superuser-only GUC depending
> on the role
Hi Fujii-san,
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 12:17 AM Fujii Masao
wrote:
> On 2022/09/05 15:17, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> > I'm not sure it's a good idea to change the function's name, because
> > that would make backpatching hard. To avoid that, how about
> > introducing a workhorse function for
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, failed
Documentation:tested, passed
Hi Christoph,
The patch have a potential, although I have
I spent a little time investigating bug #17759 [1] in more detail.
Initially, I thought that it had been fixed by 3f7836ff65, but it
turns out that's not the case.
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/17759-e76d9bece1b5421c%40postgresql.org
The immediate cause of the bug was that, before
59 matches
Mail list logo
