On 24/11/2023 00:33, Thomas Munro wrote:
Hi,
While following along with Tristan and Heikki's thread about signals
in psql, it occurred to me that the documentation atop pqsignal() is
not very good:
* we don't explain what problem it originally solved
* we don't explain why it's still
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 10:43:32AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I am not really convinced that we require a second mutex here, as
> there is always a concern with inter-locking changes. I may be
> missing something, of course, but BIO_s_socket() is just a pointer to
> a set of callbacks hidden
Hi Aleksander,
I sort of suspect that you are working on a very specific extension
and/or feature for PG fork. Any chance you could give us more details
about the case?I'm trying to adapt a multimaster solution to some changes in
pg16. We replicate temp table DDL due to some reasons.
On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 12:06 PM David Rowley wrote:
> In the attached, I've adjusted the code to use the latter of the two
> above methods in 3 places. In examine_variable() this reduces the
> complexity of the logic quite a bit and saves calling bms_is_member()
> in addition to
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 02:58:15PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 2:44 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Because --disable-thread-safe has been removed recently in
>> 68a4b58eca03. The routine could be marked as deprecated on top of
>> saying that it always returns 1 for 17~.
>
On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 3:59 AM David Rowley wrote:
>
> Another problem I hit was add_path() pfreeing a Path that I needed.
> This was happening due to how I'm building the final paths in the
> subquery when setop_pathkeys are set. Because I want to always
> include the cheapest_input_path to
On 23.11.2023 12:23, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
I think the usage of nodeToString for the generation of clause hash is
too expensive and buggy.
Also, in the code, you didn't resolve hash collisions. So, I've
rewritten the patch a bit (see the attachment).
One more thing: I propose to enable
pá 24. 11. 2023 v 2:12 odesílatel Quan Zongliang
napsal:
>
>
> On 2023/11/24 03:39, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> >
> > I modified the documentation a little bit - we don't need to extra
> > propose SQL array syntax, I think.
> > I rewrote regress tests - we don't need to test unsupported
> >
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 11:34 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> Note: With this testing, we have found a bug in the bank-wise
> approach, basically we are clearing a procglobal->clogGroupFirst, even
> before acquiring the bank lock that means in most of the cases there
> will be a single process in each
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 3:14 AM Jakub Wartak
wrote:
> CFbot failed on two hosts this time, I haven't looked at the details
> yet (https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6425149646307328 -> end of EOL? ->
> LOG: WAL summarizer process (PID 71511) was terminated by signal 6:
> Aborted?)
Robert pinged me to
Hi,
I tried to reproduce the issue and was able to reproduce it with
scripts shared by Tomas.
I tried testing it from PG17 to PG 11. This issue is reproducible for
each version.
Next I would try to test with the patch in the thread shared by Amit.
Thanks,
Shlok Kumar Kyal
While working on the patch in [1], I noticed that ever since
00b41463c, it's now suboptimal to do the following:
switch (bms_membership(relids))
{
case BMS_EMPTY_SET:
/* handle empty set */
break;
case BMS_SINGLETON:
/* call bms_singleton_member() and handle
On 14/11/2023 17:10, 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
On Thursday, November 23, 2023 11:45 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
Hi,
>
> On 11/23/23 6:13 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 4:35 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/21/23 10:32 AM, shveta malik wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 2:02 PM shveta malik
> wrote:
>
On 23/11/2023 16:23, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
This code changes tests in many places. But, as I see it, it mostly
demonstrates the positive effect of the transformation.
I found out that the postgres_fdw tests were impacted by the feature.
Fix it, because the patch is on the commitfest and
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 06:27:04PM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> There may be some changes I've missed, but hopefully, this is a nudge
> in the right direction.
Thanks for spending some time on that.
+In messages containing configuration variable names, do not include quotes
+when the
On Thu, 2023-11-23 at 11:12 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 10:25:14PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Yes, you are correct. Here is a patch that implements the FATAL test,
> > though I am not sure I have the logic correct or backwards, and I don't
> > know how to test this.
On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 08:00:00AM +0800, jian he wrote:
> not sure this is the right approach. But now the reindex event
> collection is after we call index_open.
> same static function (reindex_event_trigger_collect) in
> src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c and src/backend/catalog/index.c for
>
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 09:23:21PM +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 6:56 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I've never seen in recent years a need for a given test to use more
>> than 4~5 points. But I guess that you've seen more than that wanted
>> in a prod environment with a
I have only trivial review comments for patch v18-0001
==
src/bin/pg_upgrade/check.c
1. check_new_cluster_subscription_configuration
+ /*
+ * A slot not created yet refers to the 'i' (initialize) state, while
+ * 'r' (ready) state refer to a slot created previously but already
+ * dropped.
On 2023/11/24 03:39, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I modified the documentation a little bit - we don't need to extra
propose SQL array syntax, I think.
I rewrote regress tests - we don't need to test unsupported
functionality (related to RECORD).
- all tests passed
I wrote two examples of
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 3:34 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 12:15:22PM +0800, jian he wrote:
> > reindex_event_trigger_collect_relation called in
> > ReindexMultipleInternal, ReindexTable (line 2979).
> > Both are "under concurrent is false" branches.
> >
> > So it should
Hi,
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 at 13:43, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>
> Hello PostgreSQL Hackers,
>
> I am pleased to submit a series of patches related to the Table Access
> Method (AM) interface, which I initially announced during my talk at
> PGCon 2023 [1]. These patches are primarily designed to
Hi,
While following along with Tristan and Heikki's thread about signals
in psql, it occurred to me that the documentation atop pqsignal() is
not very good:
* we don't explain what problem it originally solved
* we don't explain why it's still needed today
* we don't explain what else it does
On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 12:42, David Rowley wrote:
> One part that still needs work is the EquivalanceClass building.
> Because we only build the final targetlist for the Append after
> planning all the append child queries, I ended up having to populate
> the EquivalanceClasses backwards, i.e
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 11:15 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Agreed on that, but I don't have that hard a time imagining cases
> where it might be useful for btree not to guarantee ordered output.
> IIRC, it currently has to do extra pushups to ensure that behavior
> in ScalarArrayOp cases. We've not
čt 23. 11. 2023 v 13:28 odesílatel Quan Zongliang
napsal:
>
>
> On 2023/11/20 17:33, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I did some deeper check:
> >
> > - I don't like too much parser's modification (I am sending alternative
> > own implementation) - the SQL parser allows richer syntax, and for
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 9:16 AM Matthias van de Meent
> wrote:
>> Is returning index scan results in (reverse) natural order not
>> optional but required with amcanorder? If it is required, why is the
>> am indicator called 'canorder' instead of 'willorder', 'doesorder'
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 9:16 AM Matthias van de Meent
wrote:
> For example, btree ignores any ordering scan keys that it is given in
> btrescan, which seems fine for btree because the ordering of a btree
> is static (and no other order than that is expected apart from it's
> reverse order), but
On 11/23/23 18:30, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bono Stebler writes:
>> After discussing the issue on irc, it looks like it could be possible
>> for the planner to use a partial index matching an expression exactly to
>> estimate its selectivity.
>
> I think going forward we're going to be more
Bono Stebler writes:
> After discussing the issue on irc, it looks like it could be possible
> for the planner to use a partial index matching an expression exactly to
> estimate its selectivity.
I think going forward we're going to be more interested in extending
CREATE STATISTICS than in
Hi,
Over in [0] and [1] there are patches that touch on the topic of
'natual ordering' index retrieval, and [2] also touches on the topic.
For those patches, I've been looking at how the planner and executor
indicate to index AMs that they expects the output to be ordered, and
how this ordering
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 05:50:48PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 1:49 AM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> One half-formed idea I have is to introduce some sort of ./configure flag
>> that enables all the newer instructions that your CPU understands.
>
> That's not doable,
It's
On 11/23/23 10:24, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 4:51 PM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/22/23 11:38, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>>
>>> Okay. IIUC, what's going on here is that the apply worker acquires
>>> AccessShareLock on pg_subscription to update rel state for one of the
>>>
On 2023-Nov-23, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> This patch set applies the explicit catalog representation of not-null
> constraints introduced by b0e96f3119 for table constraints also to domain
> not-null constraints.
I like the idea of having domain not-null constraints appear in
pg_constraint.
>
On 2023-Nov-23, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> Interestingly enough according to the documentation this syntax is
> already supported [1][2], but the actual query will fail on `master`:
>
> ```
> =# create domain connotnull integer;
> CREATE DOMAIN
> =# alter domain connotnull add not null value;
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 10:25:14PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 07:38:52PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 09:14:41AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> I could go along with just dropping the last sentence ("This
> > >>
Hi,
On 11/23/23 6:13 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 4:35 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
On 11/21/23 10:32 AM, shveta malik wrote:
On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 2:02 PM shveta malik wrote:
v37 fails to apply to HEAD due to a recent commit e83aa9f92fdd,
rebased the patches. PFA
On 11/23/23 14:26, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 06/11/2023 19:05, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> As for the path forward, I think the prefetching is demonstrably
>> beneficial. There are cases where it can't help or even harms
>> performance. I think the success depends on three areas:
>>
>> (a)
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 5:23 AM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 04:45:14PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Euler Taveira wrote:
> >
> > On 16-06-2016 09:05, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > Shouldn't pg_upgrade turn off vacuum cost delay
Dear hackers,
After discussing the issue on irc, it looks like it could be possible
for the planner to use a partial index matching an expression exactly to
estimate its selectivity.
Here is a simplified version (thanks ysch) of the issue I am facing:
https://dbfiddle.uk/flPq8-pj
I have
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 1:12 PM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 17.11.23 13:25, Amul Sul wrote:
> > To fix this we should be doing something like ALTER COLUMN TYPE and the
> pass
> > should be AT_PASS_ALTER_TYPE (rename it or invent a new one near to
> that) so
> > that in ATRewriteCatalogs(), we
On 11/23/23 13:33, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 at 20:16, Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/20/23 20:48, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
>>> On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 at 12:03, Tomas Vondra
>>> wrote:
Hi,
here's an updated patch, addressing the review
On 06/11/2023 19:05, Tomas Vondra wrote:
As for the path forward, I think the prefetching is demonstrably
beneficial. There are cases where it can't help or even harms
performance. I think the success depends on three areas:
(a) reducing the costs of the prefetching - For example right now we
Hi,
> This patch set applies the explicit catalog representation of not-null
> constraints introduced by b0e96f3119 for table constraints also to
> domain not-null constraints.
Interestingly enough according to the documentation this syntax is
already supported [1][2], but the actual query will
Hi,
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 at 20:16, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> On 11/20/23 20:48, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 at 12:03, Tomas Vondra
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> here's an updated patch, addressing the review comments, and reworking
>>> how the work is divided between the
On 2023/11/20 17:33, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I did some deeper check:
- I don't like too much parser's modification (I am sending alternative
own implementation) - the SQL parser allows richer syntax, and for full
functionality is only few lines more
Agree.
- original patch doesn't
Dear Alexander,
>
> I can easily reproduce this failure on my workstation by running 5 tests
> 003_logical_slots in parallel inside Windows VM with it's CPU resources
> limited to 50%, like so:
> VBoxManage controlvm "Windows" cpuexecutioncap 50
>
> set PGCTLTIMEOUT=180
> python3 -c
On 22/11/2023 15:00, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
I can also confirm that the patches proposed (for master and back branches)
eliminate WES leakage as expected.
Thanks for the fix!
Maybe you would find appropriate to add the comment
/* Convenience wrappers over ResourceOwnerRemember/Forget */
above
On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 at 18:34, David Zhang wrote:
>
> it would be great to switch the order of the 3rd and the 4th line to make a
> better match for "CREATE" and "CREATE OR REPLACE" .
>
I took a look at this, and I think it's probably neater to keep the
"AS SELECT" completion for CREATE [OR
Hello Kuroda-san,
21.11.2023 13:37, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
This email tells an update. The machine drongo failed the test a week ago [1]
and finally got logfiles. PSA files.
Oh, sorry. I missed to attach files. You can see pg_upgrade_server.log for now.
I can easily reproduce this
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 4:29 PM Xiang Gao wrote:
>
> Thank you for your detailed explanation.
> Can I do some testing and submit this patch?
Please do, thanks.
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 1:49 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 02:54:13PM +0200, Ants Aasma wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 at 11:44, John Naylor wrote:
> >> Poking in those files a bit, I also see references to building with
> >> SSE 4.1. Maybe that's an avenue that we should
+/*
+ * Evaluate or return the step address to evaluate a coercion of a JSON item
+ * to the target type. The former if the coercion must be done right away by
+ * calling the target type's input function, and for some types, by calling
+ * json_populate_type().
+ *
+ * Returns the step address
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 10:18:59AM +, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
> * Implement as a variant of sequence access method. I found that sequence AM
> was
> proposed many years ago [5], but it has not been active now. It might be a
> fundamental way but needs a huge works.
Well, that's
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 10:02 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, November 21, 2023 5:33 PM shveta malik
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > v37 fails to apply to HEAD due to a recent commit e83aa9f92fdd, rebased the
> > patches. PFA v37_2 patches.
>
> Thanks for updating the patches.
>
> I'd like
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 5:34 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> It's worth noting that the limited range of the input values means that
> there's a lot of bias toward some bits being set ('a' to 'z' all start with
> 0b011).
We can take advantage of the limited range with a single additional
instruction:
Hi hackers,
I want to discuss a new feature for assigning a snowflake ID[1], which can be
cluster-wide unique numbers. Also, Snowflake ID can be allocated standalone.
# Use case
A typical use case is a multi-master system constructed by logical replication.
This feature allows multi-node system
On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 8:32 PM shveta malik wrote:
>
> v37 fails to apply to HEAD due to a recent commit e83aa9f92fdd,
> rebased the patches. PFA v37_2 patches.
Thanks for the patch. Some comments:
subscriptioncmds.c:
CreateSubscription()
and tablesync.c:
process_syncing_tables_for_apply()
On 20.11.23 17:25, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut writes:
On 14.11.23 17:15, Tom Lane wrote:
I don't love the patch details though. It seems entirely wrong to check
this before we check the opclass match.
Not sure why? The order doesn't seem to matter?
The case that was bothering me
On Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 16:05:43PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 2:44=E2=80=AFPM Xiang Gao wrote:
>> * function. We could instead adopt the behavior of Arm's vmaxvq_u32(), i=
>.e.
>> * check each 32-bit element, but that would require an additional mask
>> * operation on
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 4:51 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> On 11/22/23 11:38, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > Okay. IIUC, what's going on here is that the apply worker acquires
> > AccessShareLock on pg_subscription to update rel state for one of the
> > tables say tbl-1, and then for another table say
On 21/11/2023 18:31, Alena Rybakina wrote:
Sorry, I lost your changes during the revision process. I returned
them. I raised the patch version just in case to run ci successfully.
I think the usage of nodeToString for the generation of clause hash is
too expensive and buggy.
Also, in the
On 22/11/2023 23:29, Tristan Partin wrote:
Ha, you're right. I had this working yesterday, but convinced myself it
didn't. I had a do while loop wrapping the blocking call. Here is a v4,
which seems to pass the tests that were pointed out to be failing
earlier.
Thanks! This suffers from a
On 20.11.23 08:58, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 17.11.23 19:39, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
But I feel the overall approach is wrong: originally I used hardcoded
"=" and "&&" operators, and you asked me to look them up by strategy
number instead. But that leads to trouble with core gist types vs
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 1:10 PM Nikhil Benesch wrote:
>
> While working on Materialize's streaming logical replication from Postgres
> [0],
> my colleagues Sean Loiselle and Petros Angelatos (CC'd) discovered today what
> appears to be a correctness bug in pgoutput, introduced in v15.
>
> The
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 at 05:56, Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Here are some review comments for patch v17-0001
>
> ==
> src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c
>
> 1. getSubscriptionTables
>
> +/*
> + * getSubscriptionTables
> + * Get information about subscription membership for dumpable tables. This
> + *
On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 at 07:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 09:49:41AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 7:21 AM vignesh C wrote:
> >> There are couple of things happening here: a) In the first part we
> >> take care of setting subscription relation to
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 at 21:13, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Are you aware of commit e83ebfe6d7, which added a similar WARNING at
> the point when VACUUM overwrites a relfrozenxid/relminmxid "from the
> future"? It's a recent one.
>
Thank you for reply! I hadn't noticed it. But in described above
On 20.11.23 02:25, Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
2023年7月3日(月) 18:22 Peter Eisentraut :
On 23.06.23 09:45, Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
if (!HeapTupleIsValid(tp))
+ {
+ ForeignServer *server = GetForeignServer(serverid);
+
ereport(ERROR,
hi,
i found a discuss about parallel dml, it wrote as follow,
PostgreSQL: Re: Write operations in parallel mode
Make updates and deletes parallel-restricted rather than
parallel-unsafe - i.e. allow updates and deletes but only in the
leader. This similarly would allow Update -> Gather ->
Hi,
> > If we want to add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS inside the loop I think a brief
> > comment would be appropriate.
>
> This has been completed in patch v2 and it's ready for review.
Thanks!
> > I don't think it would be useful to limit this at an arbitrary point,
> > iteration
> > count can be
On Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 15:06:18PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> On Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2023 10:36:08AM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>>>+__attribute__((target("+crc+crypto")))
>>>
>>>I'm not sure we can assume that all compilers will understand this, and I'm
>>>not sure we need it.
>>
>>
74 matches
Mail list logo
