On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 11:58:38AM +0900, torikoshia wrote:
> On 2023-11-15 09:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> You have forgotten to update the errhint at the end of
>> pg_stat_reset_shared(), where "slru" needs to be listed :)
>
> Oops, attached v2 patch.
+SELECT stats_reset >
Hi hackers,
Indeed, I think it is a little confusing that when executing
EXPLAIN(ANALYZE), even though an update is actually occurring,
the commandtag of the update result is not returned.
However, the manual also describes the information that will be
affected when EXPLAIN (ANALYZE) is
Patch v15-0001 LGTM.
==
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
Hi,
On 2023-11-14 14:42:13 +0200, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> It's possibly dumb option, but what about just removing the assert?
That's not at all an option - the in-place bms_* functions can free their
input. So a dangling pointer to the "old" version is a use-after-free waiting
to happen -
Hi,
On 2023-11-14 19:14:57 +0800, Richard Guo wrote:
> While working on BUG #18187 [1], I noticed that we also have issues with
> how SJE replaces join clauses involving the removed rel. As an example,
> consider the query below, which would trigger an Assert.
>
> create table t (a int primary
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 9:49 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 4:40 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for addressing my previous comments. Patch v14-0001 looks good
> > to me, except I have one question:
> >
> > The patch uses errmsg_internal() for the logging, but I noticed
On Mon, 2023-09-25 at 11:30 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > That's what this whole thread is about: I wish it was reasonable,
> > but I
> > don't think the tools we provide today make it reasonable. You
> > expect
> > Bob to do something like:
> >
> > CREATE FUNCTION ... SET search_path =
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 4:40 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Thanks for addressing my previous comments. Patch v14-0001 looks good
> to me, except I have one question:
>
> The patch uses errmsg_internal() for the logging, but I noticed the
> only other code using GUC 'log_replication_commands' has
On Thu, 2023-10-19 at 19:01 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> 0003: Cache for recomputeNamespacePath.
Committed with some further simplification around the OOM handling.
Instead of using MCXT_ALLOC_NO_OOM, it just temporarily sets the cache
invalid while copying the string, and sets it valid again
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 9:21 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 04:25:24PM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> > Changes looks pretty much straight forward, but patch failed to apply on
> the
> > latest master head(b41b1a7f490) at me.
>
> Thanks for taking a look. Would you mind sharing
Hi,
On 2023-11-13 21:54:39 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I noticed that the fallback pg_atomic_test_set_flag_impl() implementation
> that uses atomic-exchange is giving pg_atomic_exchange_u32_impl() an extra
> argument. This appears to be copy/pasted from the atomic-compare-exchange
> version a
On 2023-11-15 09:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 10:02:32PM +0900, torikoshia wrote:
Attached patch.
You have forgotten to update the errhint at the end of
pg_stat_reset_shared(), where "slru" needs to be listed :)
Oops, attached v2 patch.
BTW currently the
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 07:58:06AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> I am fine with this but there is no harm in doing this before or along
> with the main patch. As of now, I don't see any problem but as the
> main patch is still under review, so thought we could even wait for
> the patch to become
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 10:19 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 08:45:12AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > I think we can be specific about logical replication stuff. I have not
> > done any study on autovacuum behavior related to this, so we can
> > update about it separately
Damir Belyalov writes:
> Here is a very straw-man-level sketch of what I think might work.
> The option to COPY FROM looks something like
>
>ERRORS TO other_table_name (item [, item [, ...]])
>
> I tried to implement the patch using a table and came across a number of
> questions.
On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 07:27:02PM +0300, Gilles Darold wrote:
> Look like the tab completion for CREATE TABLE ... AS is not
> proposed.
>
> + /* Complete CREATE TABLE AS with list of keywords */
> + else if (TailMatches("CREATE", "TABLE", MatchAny, "AS") ||
> +
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 10:02:32PM +0900, torikoshia wrote:
> Attached patch.
You have forgotten to update the errhint at the end of
pg_stat_reset_shared(), where "slru" needs to be listed :)
> BTW currently the documentation explains all the arguments of
> pg_stat_reset_shared() in one line and
Hi,
On 2023-11-14 16:22:31 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > v2-0004-meson-Add-world-target.patch
> >
> > AFAICT, this world target doesn't include the man target. (Again, this
> > would all work better if we added "man" to "docs".)
>
> I agree with that sentiment - I only moved to the current
Hi,
On 2023-11-14 11:58:53 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 09.11.23 18:52, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I think if we want to do this, we'd need a configure time check for being
> > able
> > to validate a document with
> > > V4.5//EN""http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.5/docbookx.dtd;...
>
Hi,
On 2023-11-14 21:16:13 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Some comments on your patches:
>
> v2-0001-meson-Change-default-of-selinux-feature-option-to.patch
>
> Ok
>
> v2-0002-docs-Document-with-selinux-Dselinux-options-centr.patch
>
> Ok, but "selinux" should be "SELinux" when referring to
Hi,
On 2023-11-14 07:46:10 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > FreeSpaceMapVacuumRange()'s comment says:
> > * As above, but assume that only heap pages between start and end-1
> > inclusive
> > * have new free-space information, so update only the upper-level slots
> > * covering that block
On Wed, 2023-11-15 at 00:52 +0100, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> That doesn't really answer the question for me. Why would you have a
> primary key that has different collation rules (which include
> equality
> rules)
The equality rules for all deterministic collations are the same: if
the bytes
On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 at 00:28, Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2023-11-14 at 14:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Why should that ever be different from the column's own declared
> > collation?
>
> Because an index with the "C" collation is more efficient in terms of
> building/maintaining/searching the
On Tue, 2023-11-14 at 14:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Why should that ever be different from the column's own declared
> collation?
Because an index with the "C" collation is more efficient in terms of
building/maintaining/searching the index, and it also doesn't carry
risks of corrupting your PK
Hi,
Thanks for addressing my previous comments. Patch v14-0001 looks good
to me, except I have one question:
The patch uses errmsg_internal() for the logging, but I noticed the
only other code using GUC 'log_replication_commands' has errmsg()
instead of errmsg_internal(). Isn't it better to be
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 05.10.23 22:55, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I found another bit of fun we'll need to deal with: on my F38
>> platform, pgcrypto/3des fails as attached. Some googling finds
>> this relevant info:
>> https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/issues/6875
>> That is, FIPS deprecation
Thanks for your email Erik! I’ll check it out.
Regards,
Kanmani
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 12:40 PM Erik Wienhold wrote:
> On 2023-11-14 18:13 +0100, Kanmani Thamizhanban wrote:
> > Good day! I'm not able to launch Postgres PGAdmin 4 in my MAC OS, I have
> > tried with both versions 15 and 16,
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 02:11:50PM +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Good stuff here, I also have a bunch of bugfix commits that ended up not
> having a test because of the need for a debugger or other interaction,
> so let's move forward.
>
> I think the docs (and the macro/function naming)
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 08:20:08PM +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Oh, I don't. (But I wouldn't mind putting pg_attribute_deprecated to
> good use elsewhere ... not that I have any specific examples handy.)
Agreed.
> Your S key seems to be doing some funny business.
I seem to have accidentally
Some comments on your patches:
v2-0001-meson-Change-default-of-selinux-feature-option-to.patch
Ok
v2-0002-docs-Document-with-selinux-Dselinux-options-centr.patch
Ok, but "selinux" should be "SELinux" when referring to the product.
v2-0003-meson-docs-Add-doc-html-man-targets.patch
We have
Hi,
On 2023-11-14 17:49:59 +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2023-Nov-13, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2023-11-13 12:31:42 +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > On 2023-Nov-09, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > > > doc: fix wording describing the checkpoint_flush_after GUC
> > >
> > > Hmm. Is this new
Jeff Davis writes:
> On Tue, 2023-11-14 at 17:15 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> The problem is that the user has no way to declare whether they just
>> want this.
> We should add a way to declare that a primary key should create an
> index in a particular collation.
Why should that ever be
Schoemans Maxime writes:
> You can find attached a new version of the patch that can be applied on
> the current master branch of postgres.
I took a brief look through this very interesting work. I concur
with Tomas that it feels a little odd that range join selectivity
would become smarter
On Tue, 2023-11-14 at 17:15 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 14.11.23 02:58, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > If the user just wants PK/FK constraints, and equality lookups,
> > then an
> > index with the "C" collation makes a lot of sense to serve those
> > purposes.
>
> The problem is that the user has
On 2023-Nov-14, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 12:10:41PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > FWIW, I think it's fine to just nuke MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren.
> > We ask extension authors to deal with much more significant API changes
> > than that in every release, and versions
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 10:46:25PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> FWIW, there are other backward compatibility macros out there like
> tuplestore_donestoring which was introduced by commit dd04e95 21 years
> ago and SPI_push() and its friends which were made no-ops macros by
> commit 1833f1a 7
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 12:10:41PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> FWIW, I think it's fine to just nuke MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren.
> We ask extension authors to deal with much more significant API changes
> than that in every release, and versions where the updated code wouldn't
> work are long
Aleksander Alekseev writes:
>> There are a couple of points worth bikeshedding perhaps. I didn't
>> spend much thought on the wrapper functions' names, but it's surely
>> true that the semantic difference between contain_mutable_functions
>> and ContainMutableFunctions is quite un-apparent from
On 2023-11-14 18:13 +0100, Kanmani Thamizhanban wrote:
> Good day! I'm not able to launch Postgres PGAdmin 4 in my MAC OS, I have
> tried with both versions 15 and 16, but nothing is working. It says that it
> has quit unexpectedly (screenshot attached). I have attached the bug report
> as well
On 2023-11-13 21:49 +0100, Tom Lane wrote:
> Patch pushed with minor adjustments, mainly rewriting some comments.
Thanks a lot!
--
Erik
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 9:50 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2023-Nov-13, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> > Shall we retire this backwards compatibility macro at this point? A search
> > of https://codesearch.debian.net/ does reveal a few external uses, so we
> > could alternatively leave it around
Nathan Bossart writes:
>> It might be worth introducing pg_attribute_deprecated() in c.h. I'm not
>> too worried about this particular macro, but it seems handy in general.
> Huh, this was brought up before [0].
> [0] https://postgr.es/m/20200825183002.fkvzxtneijsdgrfv%40alap3.anarazel.de
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 11:01:15AM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 04:36:44PM +, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> There's also __attribute__((deprecated)) (and and __declspec(deprecated)
>> for MSVC), but that can AFAIK only be attached to functions and
>> variables,
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 04:36:44PM +, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Is there a preprocessor symbol that is defined when building Postgres
> itself (and extensions in /contrib/), but not third-party extensions (or
> vice versa)? If so, the macro could be guarded by that, so that uses
>
Hola-hallo,
On 2023-Nov-13, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-11-13 12:31:42 +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2023-Nov-09, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > doc: fix wording describing the checkpoint_flush_after GUC
> >
> > Hmm. Is this new wording really more clear than the original wording?
> >
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> On 2023-Nov-13, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
>> Shall we retire this backwards compatibility macro at this point? A search
>> of https://codesearch.debian.net/ does reveal a few external uses, so we
>> could alternatively leave it around and just update Postgres to stop
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 05:20:16PM +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Let's leave the macro around and just remove its uses in PGDG-owned
> code. Having the macro around hurts nothing, and we can remove it in 15
> years or so.
WFM
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On 2023-Nov-13, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Shall we retire this backwards compatibility macro at this point? A search
> of https://codesearch.debian.net/ does reveal a few external uses, so we
> could alternatively leave it around and just update Postgres to stop using
> it, but I don't think it
On 14.11.23 02:58, Jeff Davis wrote:
If the user just wants PK/FK constraints, and equality lookups, then an
index with the "C" collation makes a lot of sense to serve those
purposes.
The problem is that the user has no way to declare whether they just
want this. The default assumption is
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 13.11.23 21:04, Laurenz Albe wrote:
>> This will be backpatched, right? What if somebody already created an index
>> like that?
>> Does this warrant an entry in the "however" for the release notes, or is the
>> case
>> exotic enough that we can assume that nobody
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 10:59:04AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nathan Bossart writes:
>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 04:25:24PM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
>>> Changes looks pretty much straight forward, but patch failed to apply on the
>>> latest master head(b41b1a7f490) at me.
>
>> Thanks for taking a
On 13.11.23 17:49, Jeff Davis wrote:
On Mon, 2023-11-13 at 13:43 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 11.11.23 01:03, Jeff Davis wrote:
But the database collation is always deterministic,
So far!
Yeah, if we did that, clearly the index collation would need to match
that of the database to be
On 13.11.23 21:04, Laurenz Albe wrote:
On Mon, 2023-11-13 at 10:24 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
* If this table is partitioned and we're creating a unique index, primary
* key, or exclusion constraint, make sure that the partition key is a
* subset of the index's columns.
Nathan Bossart writes:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 04:25:24PM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
>> Changes looks pretty much straight forward, but patch failed to apply on the
>> latest master head(b41b1a7f490) at me.
> Thanks for taking a look. Would you mind sharing the error(s) you are
> seeing? The
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 04:25:24PM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> Changes looks pretty much straight forward, but patch failed to apply on the
> latest master head(b41b1a7f490) at me.
Thanks for taking a look. Would you mind sharing the error(s) you are
seeing? The patch applies fine on cfbot and my
Hi,
On 11/13/23 2:57 PM, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2023 4:16 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
Yeah good point, agree to just error out in all the case then (if we discard the
sync_ reserved wording proposal, which seems to be the case as probably not
worth the extra
On 2023-Nov-14, Thomas Munro wrote:
> I suppose we could also supply a set of macros with the numbers that
> map straight onto the numberless ones, with a note that they will be
> deleted after N releases.
Maybe just keep compatibility ones with 1 and 2 arguments (the ones most
used) forever, or
0001 looks OK to push, and since it stands on its own I would get it out
of the way soon rather than waiting for the rest of the series to be
further reviewed.
0002:
This moves bin/pg_verifybackup/parse_manifest.c to
common/parse_manifest.c, where it's not clear that it's for backup
manifests
Hi!
Matthias, regarding your message above, I have a question to ask.
On typed TOAST implementations - we thought that TOAST method used
for storing data could depend not only on data type, but on the flow or
workload,
like out bytea appendable toaster which is much (hundreds of times) faster
on
Hello,
Good stuff here, I also have a bunch of bugfix commits that ended up not
having a test because of the need for a debugger or other interaction,
so let's move forward.
I think the docs (and the macro/function naming) describe things
backwards. In my mind, it is INJECTION_POINT_RUN() that
On 2023-11-13 13:15, torikoshia wrote:
On 2023-11-12 16:46, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 01:15:50PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
The comments added could be better grammatically, but basically LGTM.
I'll take care of that if there are no objections.
The documentation also
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 8:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-11-13 17:13:32 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > diff --git a/src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c
> > b/src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c
> > index 6985d299b2..8b729828ce 100644
> > --- a/src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c
> >
Hi!
Thank you for spotting this and dealing with this.
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 1:15 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> While working on BUG #18187 [1], I noticed that we also have issues with
> how SJE replaces join clauses involving the removed rel. As an example,
> consider the query below, which would
Hi,
I noticed that the patchset needs a review and decided to take a look.
> There are a couple of points worth bikeshedding perhaps. I didn't
> spend much thought on the wrapper functions' names, but it's surely
> true that the semantic difference between contain_mutable_functions
> and
On 11/14/23 02:58, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-11-13 at 22:36 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Yeah. I don't quite agree with the initial argument that not
>> specifying
>> the collation explicitly in CREATE TABLE or a query means the user
>> does
>> not care about the collation.
>
> I
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 06:32:27PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> I would like to see a few example tests using this facility - without that
> it's a bit hard to judge how the impact on core code would be and how easy
> tests are to write.
Sure. I was wondering if people would be interested in
While working on BUG #18187 [1], I noticed that we also have issues with
how SJE replaces join clauses involving the removed rel. As an example,
consider the query below, which would trigger an Assert.
create table t (a int primary key, b int);
explain (costs off)
select * from t t1
inner
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 at 12:49, Dean Rasheed wrote:
>
> OK, I have pushed 0001 and 0002. Here's the remaining (main) patch.
>
OK, I have now pushed the main patch.
Regards,
Dean
On 09.11.23 18:52, Andres Freund wrote:
Besides giving you a quick validity check of the XML, this also builds the
doc_generated, which draw from non-doc source files, so this would also
serve to check that those are sound and didn't mess up the docs.
Unfortunately presence of xmllint doesn't
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 12:30 AM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> I just found myself researching the difference between MemoryContextReset()
> and MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren(), and it turns out that as of
> commit eaa5808 (2015), there is none.
> MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren() is just a
On 05.10.23 22:55, Tom Lane wrote:
I found another bit of fun we'll need to deal with: on my F38
platform, pgcrypto/3des fails as attached. Some googling finds
this relevant info:
https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/issues/6875
That is, FIPS deprecation of 3DES is happening even as we speak.
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 9:09 PM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 13.11.23 14:07, Amul Sul wrote:
> > Also, it seems to me that the SET EXPRESSION variant should just do
> an
> > update of the catalog table instead of a drop and re-insert.
> >
> > I am not sure if that is sufficient; we need
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 20:56, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2023-11-12 11:41:15 -0500, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 at 07:57, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > > I am getting the following error
> > > building on HEAD
> > >
> > > Library crypto found: YES
> > > Checking for function
Other than the documentation details and the business about
Gen_dummy_probes, which has been dealt with separately, this patch looks
solid to me.
On 12.10.23 07:23, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 09:38:51AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
- I think we can't just delete
Hi!
On 14.11.2023 13:10, Damir Belyalov wrote:
Here is a very straw-man-level sketch of what I think might work.
The option to COPY FROM looks something like
ERRORS TO other_table_name (item [, item [, ...]])
I tried to implement the patch using a table and came across a
> Here is a very straw-man-level sketch of what I think might work.
> The option to COPY FROM looks something like
>
> ERRORS TO other_table_name (item [, item [, ...]])
>
I tried to implement the patch using a table and came across a number of
questions.
Which table should we implement
On 13.11.23 06:30, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 08:38:21AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
How about this patch as a comprehensive solution?
8 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 339 deletions(-)
Thanks for the patch. The numbers are here, and the patch looks
sensible.
The
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 2:10 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 11:25 AM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > Great stuff you got here. I'm doing a first pass trying to grok the
> > whole thing for more substantive comments, but in the meantime here are
> > some cosmetic ones.
>
>
Hi,
On 11/13/23 9:44 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2023-11-13 09:26:56 +0100, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
--- a/src/backend/storage/buffer/bufmgr.c
+++ b/src/backend/storage/buffer/bufmgr.c
@@ -799,11 +799,19 @@ ReadBufferExtended(Relation reln, ForkNumber forkNum,
BlockNumber blockNum,
79 matches
Mail list logo
