Re: BackgroundPsql's set_query_timer_restart() may not work

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:23 PM Tom Lane wrote: > > Bharath Rupireddy writes: > > A nitpick on the patch - how about honoring the passed-in parameter > > with something like $self->{query_timer_restart} = 1 if !defined > > $self->{query_timer_restart}; instead of just setting it to 1 (a value >

Re: [HACKERS] Changing references of password encryption to hashing

Greetings, * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:24 PM Stephen Frost wrote: > > I don’t know what they’re doing now, as you don’t say, and so I really > > couldn’t say if ldap is better or worse for them. In some cases, sure, > > perhaps ldap is better than

Re: autovectorize page checksum code included elsewhere

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 7:51 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2023-11-25 14:09:14 +0700, John Naylor wrote: > > * Note: I have seen the threads with the idea of compiling multiple > > entire binaries, and switching at postmaster start. I think it's a > > good idea, but I also suspect

Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements

Hello Alexander, 25.11.2023 23:46, Alexander Korotkov wrote: On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 10:45 PM Andrei Zubkov wrote: I've noted a strange space in a commit message of 0001 patch: "I t is needed for upcoming patch..." It looks like a typo. Thank you for catching it. I'll fix this before

RE: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby

On Tuesday, November 28, 2023 8:07 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: Hi, > On 11/27/23 9:57 AM, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) wrote: > > On Monday, November 27, 2023 4:51 PM shveta malik > wrote: > > > > Here is the updated version(v39_2) which include all the changes made in > 0002. > > Please use for

Re: EXCLUDE COLLATE in CREATE/ALTER TABLE document

On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 4:55 AM shihao zhong wrote: > > Hi Jian, > > Thanks for your comments, a new version is attached. > > Thanks, > Shihao > > On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 9:59 AM jian he wrote: >> >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 10:30 AM shihao zhong wrote: >> > >> > Thank you for your feedback on my

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

FTR, I've pushed this and the buildfarm seems happy. In particular, I just updated indri to the latest MacPorts packages including OpenSSL 3.2.0, so we'll have coverage of that going forward. regards, tom lane

Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 9:28 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: > > Hi, > > On 11/28/23 10:40 AM, shveta malik wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:19 PM Drouvot, Bertrand > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 11/28/23 4:13 AM, shveta malik wrote: > >>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 4:08 PM Amit Kapila >

Re: common signal handler protection

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 06:37:50PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > For a moment I was, wrongly, worried this would break signal handlers we > intentionally inherit from postmaster. It's fine though, because we block > signals in fork_process() until somewhere in InitPostmasterChild(), after > we've

Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby

Hi. Here are some review comments for the patch v39_2-0001. Multiple items from my previous review [1] seemed unanswered, so it wasn't clear if they were discarded because they were wrong or maybe accidently missed. I've repeated all those again here, as well as some new comments. == 1.

Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 2:17 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: > > On 11/2/23 1:27 AM, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 31, 2023 6:45 PM Amit Kapila > > wrote: > >> We have create_replication_slot and drop_replication_slot in repl_gram.y. > >> How > >> about if introduce

Re: Fix assertion in autovacuum worker

Hi, On 2023-11-28 20:42:47 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 04:03:49PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2023-11-28 16:05:16 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote: > >> From a glance, it looks to me like the problem is that pgstat_shutdown_hook > >> is registered as a

Re: Fix assertion in autovacuum worker

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 04:03:49PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2023-11-28 16:05:16 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote: >> From a glance, it looks to me like the problem is that pgstat_shutdown_hook >> is registered as a before_shmem_exit callback, while ProcKill is registered >> as an on_shmem_exit

Re: common signal handler protection

Hi, On 2023-11-27 16:16:25 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 02:59:45PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > > Hm. I wonder if this indicates an issue. Do the preceding changes perhaps > > make it more likely that a child process of the startup process could hang > > around for

Re: common signal handler protection

Hi, On 2023-11-28 15:39:55 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote: > From e4bea5353c2685457545b67396095e9b96156982 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Nathan Bossart > Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 14:58:20 -0600 > Subject: [PATCH v3 1/3] Check that MyProcPid == getpid() in all signal > handlers. > > In commit

Re: remaining sql/json patches

Hi, On 2023-11-28 20:58:41 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 2023-11-28 Tu 19:32, Tom Lane wrote: > > Andrew Dunstan writes: > > So I'm now a bit baffled. Can you provide more color on what > > your test setup is? > > > *sigh* yes, you're right. I inadvertently used a setup that used meson

RE: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node

Dear Sawada-san, > > Actually, we do not expect that it won't input NULL. IIUC all of slots have > > slot_name, and subquery uses its name. But will it be kept forever? I think > > we > > can avoid any risk. > > > > > I've not tested it yet but even if it returns NULL, perhaps > > >

Re: remaining sql/json patches

On 2023-11-28 Tu 19:32, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: Cool, I took this and ran with it a bit. (See attached) Here are comparative timings for 1000 iterations parsing most of the information_schema.sql, all the way back to 9.3: ... REL_15_STABLE Time: 3372.491 ms

Re: [PATCH] ltree hash functions

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 6:09 AM Tommy Pavlicek wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 2:18 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > > > > On 19 Jun 2023, at 11:18, Tommy Pavlicek wrote: > > > > > Tommy, are you interested in extending ALTER OPERATOR to allow this, > > > which would also allow fixing the

Re: Streaming I/O, vectored I/O (WIP)

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 01:17:19AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: Thanks for posting a new version. I've included a review of 0004. > I've included just the pg_prewarm example user for now while we > discuss the basic infrastructure. The rest are rebased and in my > public Github branch

Re: Optimizing nbtree ScalarArrayOp execution, allowing multi-column ordered scans, skip scan

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 3:52 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > While I still think that we need heuristics that apply speculative > criteria to decide whether or not going to the next page directly > (when we have a choice at all), that doesn't mean that the v7 > heuristics can't be improved on, with a

Re: remaining sql/json patches

Andrew Dunstan writes: > Cool, I took this and ran with it a bit. (See attached) Here are > comparative timings for 1000 iterations parsing most of the > information_schema.sql, all the way back to 9.3: > ... > REL_15_STABLE > Time: 3372.491 ms (00:03.372) > REL_16_STABLE >

Re: remaining sql/json patches

Hi, On 2023-11-28 15:57:45 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > To avoid upsetting the cfbot, I published the code here: > Neat. I wonder if we ought to include something like this into core, so that we can more easily evaluate performance effects going

Re: Fix assertion in autovacuum worker

Hi, On 2023-11-28 16:05:16 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 07:00:16PM +0100, David Geier wrote: > > PostgreSQL hit the following assertion during error cleanup, after being OOM > > in dsa_allocate0(): > > > > void dshash_detach(dshash_table *hash_table) { > >

Re: Optimizing nbtree ScalarArrayOp execution, allowing multi-column ordered scans, skip scan

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 9:19 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > I'm not convinced this is a problem we have to solve. It's possible it > > only affects cases that are implausible in practice (the script forces a > > particular scan type, and maybe it would not be picked in practice). But > > maybe

Re: [HACKERS] Changing references of password encryption to hashing

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:24 PM Stephen Frost wrote: > I don’t know what they’re doing now, as you don’t say, and so I really > couldn’t say if ldap is better or worse for them. In some cases, sure, > perhaps ldap is better than … something else, That's EXACTLY right. You can't say whether

Re: [PATCH] ltree hash functions

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 2:18 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > > On 19 Jun 2023, at 11:18, Tommy Pavlicek wrote: > > > Tommy, are you interested in extending ALTER OPERATOR to allow this, > > which would also allow fixing the ltree operator? > > > > Yes, I can do that. I took a look over the code

Re: Fix assertion in autovacuum worker

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 07:00:16PM +0100, David Geier wrote: > PostgreSQL hit the following assertion during error cleanup, after being OOM > in dsa_allocate0(): > > void dshash_detach(dshash_table *hash_table) { > ASSERT_NO_PARTITION_LOCKS_HELD_BY_ME(hash_table); > > called from

Re: common signal handler protection

Here is a new patch set with feedback addressed. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com >From e4bea5353c2685457545b67396095e9b96156982 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nathan Bossart Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 14:58:20 -0600 Subject: [PATCH v3 1/3] Check that MyProcPid ==

Re: remaining sql/json patches

On 2023-11-28 Tu 15:49, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 2023-11-28 Tu 00:10, John Naylor wrote: On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 8:57 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote: Interesting. But inferring a speed effect from such changes is difficult. I don't have a good idea about measuring parser speed, but a tool to do

Re: remaining sql/json patches

On 2023-11-28 Tu 00:10, John Naylor wrote: On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 8:57 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote: Interesting. But inferring a speed effect from such changes is difficult. I don't have a good idea about measuring parser speed, but a tool to do that would be useful. Amit has made a start on

Re: Testing autovacuum wraparound (including failsafe)

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 7:16 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > > On 28 Nov 2023, at 03:00, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 10:40 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > >> > >>> On 27 Nov 2023, at 14:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > >> > >>> Is it true that we can modify the timeout

Re: Catalog domain not-null constraints

On 23.11.23 14:13, Aleksander Alekseev wrote: =# create domain connotnull1 integer; =# create domain connotnull2 integer; =# alter domain connotnull1 add not null value; =# alter domain connotnull2 set not null; =# \dD ERROR: unexpected null value in cached tuple for catalog pg_constraint

Re: Memory consumed by paths during partitionwise join planning

On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 at 02:06, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > Table 1: Join between unpartitioned tables > Number of tables | without patch | with patch | % reduction | > being joined ||| | > -- >

Re: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:58 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote: > > Dear Sawada-san, > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 7:04 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yeah, we followed binary_upgrade_create_empty_extension(). Also, we set as > > > un-strict to keep a caller function

Re: Properly pathify the union planner

On Fri, 24 Nov 2023 at 18:43, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 3:59 AM David Rowley wrote: > > For now, as a temporary fix, I've just #ifdef'd out the code in > > add_path() that's pfreeing the old path. I have drafted a patch that > > refcounts Paths, but I'm unsure if that's

Re: Missing docs on AT TIME ZONE precedence?

Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 2023-11-28 Tu 10:27, Tom Lane wrote: >> OK. How about rewriting that first para like this? > LGTM. Thanks. Thanks for reviewing. While checking things over one more time, I noticed that there was an additional violation of this precept, dating back to long before

Re: May be BUG. Periodic burst growth of the checkpoint_req counter on replica.

Hi, Anton! On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 2:39 PM Anton A. Melnikov wrote: > On 15.03.2023 21:29, Gregory Stark (as CFM) wrote: > > > These patches that are "Needs Review" and have received no comments at > > all since before March 1st are these. If your patch is amongst this > > list I would suggest

Re: Python installation selection in Meson

Hi, On 2023-11-28 19:02:42 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I noticed that under meson, the selection of the Python installation using > the 'PYTHON' option doesn't work completely. The 'PYTHON' option determined > the Python binary that will be used to call the various build support > programs.

Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings

Hi! On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 2:06 PM Aleksander Alekseev wrote: > > >> > I think what's done in patch 0001 is just an extension of existing > >> > logic and moving it into separate function. > >> > >> That's right. I'm arguing that now is a good time to clean it up. > >> > >> I won't insist if

Python installation selection in Meson

I noticed that under meson, the selection of the Python installation using the 'PYTHON' option doesn't work completely. The 'PYTHON' option determined the Python binary that will be used to call the various build support programs. But it doesn't affect the Python installation used for

Fix assertion in autovacuum worker

Hi hackers, PostgreSQL hit the following assertion during error cleanup, after being OOM in dsa_allocate0(): void dshash_detach(dshash_table *hash_table) { ASSERT_NO_PARTITION_LOCKS_HELD_BY_ME(hash_table); called from pgstat_shutdown_hook(), called from shmem_exit(), called from

Re: Parallel CREATE INDEX for BRIN indexes

On 11/28/23 16:39, Matthias van de Meent wrote: > On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 at 14:35, Tomas Vondra > wrote: >> On 11/23/23 13:33, Matthias van de Meent wrote: >>> The union operator may leak (lots of) memory, so I think it makes >>> sense to keep a context around that can be reset after we've extracted

Re: [HACKERS] Changing references of password encryption to hashing

Greetings, On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 20:19 Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:16 AM Stephen Frost wrote: > > We pass a completely cleartext password to the server from the client. > > Yes, we might encrypt it on the way with TLS, but even SSH realized how > > terrible that is long,

Re: Optimizing nbtree ScalarArrayOp execution, allowing multi-column ordered scans, skip scan

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 4:29 AM Tomas Vondra wrote: > I haven't looked at the code, but I decided to do a bit of blackbox perf > and stress testing, to get some feeling of what to expect in terms of > performance improvements, and see if there happen to be some unexpected > regressions. Attached

Re: archive modules loose ends

Here is a new version of the patch with feedback addressed. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com >From 3cda5bb87c82738ad6f8a082ef5dfeb49cd51392 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nathan Bossart Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 11:17:13 -0600 Subject: [PATCH v3 1/1] archiver exception

Re: [PATCH] LockAcquireExtended improvement

Hi, On 2023-11-28 20:52:31 +0800, Jingxian Li wrote: > postgres=*# lock table test in exclusive mode ; > > > T4 > > Case 1: > > postgres=*# lock table test in share row exclusive mode nowait; > > ERROR: could not obtain lock on relation > "test" > >

Re: pg_upgrade and logical replication

On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 at 06:53, Peter Smith wrote: > > Here are some review comments for patch set v19* > > // > > v19-0001. > > No comments > > /// > > v19-0002. > > (I saw that both changes below seemed cut/paste from similar > functions, but I will ask the questions anyway). > > == >

Re: pg_upgrade and logical replication

On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 at 17:50, Amit Kapila wrote: > > 2. > + * b) SUBREL_STATE_SYNCDONE: A relation upgraded while in this state > + * would retain the replication origin in certain cases. > > I think this is vague. Can we briefly describe cases where the origins > would be retained? Modified >

Re: [HACKERS] Changing references of password encryption to hashing

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:16 AM Stephen Frost wrote: > We pass a completely cleartext password to the server from the client. > Yes, we might encrypt it on the way with TLS, but even SSH realized how > terrible that is long, long ago and strongly discourages it these days. > > The problem with

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

On Tue Nov 28, 2023 at 10:06 AM CST, Tom Lane wrote: "Tristan Partin" writes: > On Tue Nov 28, 2023 at 9:42 AM CST, Tom Lane wrote: >> I have no interest in supporting BoringSSL. I just replied to >> Daniel's comment because it seemed to resolve the last concern >> about whether your patch is

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

"Tristan Partin" writes: > On Tue Nov 28, 2023 at 9:42 AM CST, Tom Lane wrote: >> I have no interest in supporting BoringSSL. I just replied to >> Daniel's comment because it seemed to resolve the last concern >> about whether your patch is OK. > If you haven't started fixing the tests, then

Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby

Hi, On 11/28/23 10:40 AM, shveta malik wrote: On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:19 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: Hi, On 11/28/23 4:13 AM, shveta malik wrote: On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 4:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote: On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 2:27 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) wrote: Here is the updated

Re: Annoying build warnings from latest Apple toolchain

On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 9:59 AM Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Btw., I'm also seeing warnings like this. I'm using homebrew. Here is > a sample: > > [145/147] Linking target src/test/modules/test_shm_mq/test_shm_mq.dylib > -macosx_version_min has been renamed to -macos_version_min > ld: warning:

Re: Missing docs on AT TIME ZONE precedence?

On 2023-11-28 Tu 10:27, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: Looks good. Perhaps the comments above the UNBOUNDED precedence setting (esp. the first paragraph) need strengthening, with a stern injunction to avoid different precedence for non-reserved keywords if at all possible. OK. How

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

On Tue Nov 28, 2023 at 9:42 AM CST, Tom Lane wrote: "Tristan Partin" writes: > When you say "this" are you referring to the patch I sent or adding > support for BoringSSL? I have no interest in supporting BoringSSL. I just replied to Daniel's comment because it seemed to resolve the last

Re: Add recovery to pg_control and remove backup_label

Greetings, * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 3:42 AM Stephen Frost wrote: > > What would really be helpful would be hearing from these individuals > > directly as to what the issues are with the changes, such that perhaps > > we can do things better in the

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

"Tristan Partin" writes: > When you say "this" are you referring to the patch I sent or adding > support for BoringSSL? I have no interest in supporting BoringSSL. I just replied to Daniel's comment because it seemed to resolve the last concern about whether your patch is OK.

Re: Parallel CREATE INDEX for BRIN indexes

On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 at 14:35, Tomas Vondra wrote: > On 11/23/23 13:33, Matthias van de Meent wrote: >> The union operator may leak (lots of) memory, so I think it makes >> sense to keep a context around that can be reset after we've extracted >> the merge result. >> > > But does the current code

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

On Tue Nov 28, 2023 at 9:31 AM CST, Tom Lane wrote: "Tristan Partin" writes: > How are you guys running the tests? I have PG_TEST_EXTRA=ssl and > everything passes for me. Granted, I am using the Meson build. I'm doing what it says in test/ssl/README: make check PG_TEST_EXTRA=ssl I

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

"Tristan Partin" writes: > How are you guys running the tests? I have PG_TEST_EXTRA=ssl and > everything passes for me. Granted, I am using the Meson build. I'm doing what it says in test/ssl/README: make check PG_TEST_EXTRA=ssl I don't know whether the meson build has support for

Re: Missing docs on AT TIME ZONE precedence?

Andrew Dunstan writes: > Looks good. Perhaps the comments above the UNBOUNDED precedence setting > (esp. the first paragraph) need strengthening, with a stern injunction > to avoid different precedence for non-reserved keywords if at all possible. OK. How about rewriting that first para like

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

How are you guys running the tests? I have PG_TEST_EXTRA=ssl and everything passes for me. Granted, I am using the Meson build. -- Tristan Partin Neon (https://neon.tech)

Re: [HACKERS] Changing references of password encryption to hashing

Greetings, * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 9:55 AM Stephen Frost wrote: > > I do think we should use the correct terminology in our documentation > > and would support your working on improving things in this area. > > +1. > > > I do wonder if perhaps we

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

On Tue Nov 28, 2023 at 9:00 AM CST, Tom Lane wrote: Daniel Gustafsson writes: > Thats not an issue, we don't support building with BoringSSL. Right. I'll work on getting this pushed, unless someone else is already on it? When you say "this" are you referring to the patch I sent or adding

Re: [HACKERS] Changing references of password encryption to hashing

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 9:55 AM Stephen Frost wrote: > I do think we should use the correct terminology in our documentation > and would support your working on improving things in this area. +1. > I do wonder if perhaps we would be better off by having someone spend > time on removing terribly

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

Daniel Gustafsson writes: > Thats not an issue, we don't support building with BoringSSL. Right. I'll work on getting this pushed, unless someone else is already on it? regards, tom lane

Re: [HACKERS] Changing references of password encryption to hashing

Greetings, * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > Is there any interest in fixing our documentation that says encrypted > when it means hashed? Should I pursue this? I do think we should use the correct terminology in our documentation and would support your working on improving things in

Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2

On 11/28/23 12:32, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 11:45 PM Tomas Vondra > wrote: >> >> I spent a bit of time looking at the proposed change, and unfortunately >> logging just the boolean flag does not work. A good example is this bit >> from a TAP test added by the patch for

Re: Partial aggregates pushdown

Greetings, * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 4:23 PM Tom Lane wrote: > > Well, one of the founding principles of postgres_fdw was to be able > > to talk to PG servers that are not of the same version as yours. > > If we break that in the name of performance,

RE: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node

Dear Sawada-san, > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 7:04 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) > wrote: > > > > > > Yeah, we followed binary_upgrade_create_empty_extension(). Also, we set as > > un-strict to keep a caller function simpler. > > > > Currently get_old_cluster_logical_slot_infos() executes a query and

Re: Missing docs on AT TIME ZONE precedence?

On 2023-Nov-27, Tom Lane wrote: > I don't like the existing coding for more reasons than just > underdocumentation. Global assignment of precedence is a really, > really dangerous tool for solving ambiguous-grammar problems, because > it can mask problems unrelated to the one you think you are

Re: Streaming I/O, vectored I/O (WIP)

On 28/11/2023 14:17, Thomas Munro wrote: On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 7:33 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote: in streaming_read.h: typedef bool (*PgStreamingReadBufferDetermineNextCB) (PgStreamingRead *pgsr, uintptr_t pgsr_private, void *per_io_private, BufferManagerRelation

[PATCH] LockAcquireExtended improvement

Hi hackers, I found a problem when doing the test shown below: Time Session A Session B T1 postgres=# create table test(a int); CREATE TABLE postgres=# insert into test values (1); INSERT 0 1 T2

Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes

On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 8:08 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > Maybe it should be the responsibility of some other phase of query > processing, invented solely to make life easier for the optimizer, but > not formally part of query planning per se. I don't really see why that would be useful. Adding

Re: Partial aggregates pushdown

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 5:24 AM Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > If my memory serves me right, PGXC implemented partial aggregation > only when the output of partial aggregate was a SQL data type > (non-Internal, non-Unknown). But I may be wrong. But at that time, > JSONB wasn't there or wasn't that

Re: Streaming I/O, vectored I/O (WIP)

On 28/11/2023 14:17, Thomas Munro wrote: On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 7:33 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote: + /* Avoid a slightly more expensive kernel call if there is no benefit. */ + if (iovcnt == 1) + returnCode = pg_pread(vfdP->fd, +

Re: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 6:50 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 1:32 PM Bharath Rupireddy > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 11:06 AM Masahiko Sawada > > wrote: > > > > > > One month has already been passed since this main patch got committed > > > but reading this change,

Re: Fix a wrong comment in setrefs.c

On 03/11/2023 08:10, Richard Guo wrote: On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 9:51 AM Richard Guo > wrote: On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 5:45 AM Tom Lane mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote: I'm inclined to write the comment more like "Usually the equal() check is

Re: ALTER COLUMN ... SET EXPRESSION to alter stored generated column's expression

On 23.11.23 15:13, Amul Sul wrote: The exact sequencing of this seems to be tricky.  It's clear that we need to do it earlier than at the end.  I also think it should be strictly after AT_PASS_ALTER_TYPE so that the new expression can refer to the new type of a column.  It should

Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby

Hi, On 11/27/23 9:57 AM, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) wrote: On Monday, November 27, 2023 4:51 PM shveta malik wrote: Here is the updated version(v39_2) which include all the changes made in 0002. Please use for review, and sorry for the confusion. Thanks! As far v39_2-0001: " Altering the

Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings

Hi, >> > I think what's done in patch 0001 is just an extension of existing >> > logic and moving it into separate function. >> >> That's right. I'm arguing that now is a good time to clean it up. >> >> I won't insist if Alexander prefers to commit it as it is, though. But >> let's at least

Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes

On 28/11/2023 04:03, Robert Haas wrote: On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 3:02 AM Andrei Lepikhov wrote: On 25/11/2023 08:23, Alexander Korotkov wrote: I think patch certainly gets better in this aspect. One thing I can't understand is why do we use home-grown code for resolving hash-collisions. You

Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2

On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 11:45 PM Tomas Vondra wrote: > > I spent a bit of time looking at the proposed change, and unfortunately > logging just the boolean flag does not work. A good example is this bit > from a TAP test added by the patch for built-in replication (which was > not included with

Re: pg_upgrade and logical replication

On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 at 17:12, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 3:18 PM vignesh C wrote: > > > > On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 at 17:50, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 7:21 AM vignesh C wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Few comments on v19: > > > == > > > 1.

Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings

On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 at 14:37, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 28/11/2023 12:14, Pavel Borisov wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 at 13:13, Heikki Linnakangas > wrote: > >> > >> On 27/11/2023 01:43, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > >>> v61 looks good to me. I'm going to push it as long as there are no >

Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings

On 28/11/2023 12:14, Pavel Borisov wrote: On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 at 13:13, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: On 27/11/2023 01:43, Alexander Korotkov wrote: v61 looks good to me. I'm going to push it as long as there are no objections. This was discussed earlier, but is still present in v61: +/* + *

Re: Table AM Interface Enhancements

Hi, Alexander! I think table AM extensibility is a very good idea generally, not only in the scope of APIs that are needed in OrioleDB. Thanks for your proposals! For patches > 0001-Allow-locking-updated-tuples-in-tuple_update-and--v1.patch

Re: Partial aggregates pushdown

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 5:21 AM Robert Haas wrote: > > TBH, I suspect even some PG forks have made this work, like maybe PGXC > or PGXL, although I don't know for certain. We might not like the > trade-offs they made to get there, but we haven't even talked through > possible design ideas yet, so

Re: WIP: libpq: add a possibility to not send D(escribe) when executing a prepared statement

Hi Tom! Thank you for considering this. It adds a whole new set of programmer-error possibilities, and I doubt it saves enough in typical cases to justify creating such a foot-gun. Although I agree it adds a considerable amount of complexity, I'd argue it doesn't bring the complexity to a new

Re: Testing autovacuum wraparound (including failsafe)

> On 28 Nov 2023, at 03:00, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 10:40 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> >>> On 27 Nov 2023, at 14:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> >>> Is it true that we can modify the timeout after creating >>> BackgroundPsql object? If so, it seems we don't need to

Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings

Hi, Heikki! On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 at 13:13, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > > On 27/11/2023 01:43, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > v61 looks good to me. I'm going to push it as long as there are no > > objections. > This was discussed earlier, but is still present in v61: > > > +/* > > + * An internal

Re: proposal: change behavior on collation version mismatch

Jeremy Schneider wrote: > 1) "collation changes are uncommon" (which is relatively correct) > 2) "most users would rather have ease-of-use than 100% safety, since > it's uncommon" > > And I think this led to the current behavior of issuing a warning rather > than an error, There's a

RE: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node

Dear Bharath, Sawada-san, Welcome back! > > > > --- > > { oid => '8046', descr => 'for use by pg_upgrade', > > proname => 'binary_upgrade_logical_slot_has_caught_up', proisstrict => > > 'f', > > provolatile => 'v', proparallel => 'u', prorettype => 'bool', > > proargtypes => 'name', > >

Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby

On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 5:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 5:34 PM shveta malik wrote: > > > > PFA v35. > > > > Review v35-0002* > == > 1. > As quoted in the commit message, > > > If a logical slot is invalidated on the primary, slot on the standby is also >

Re: [PATCH] psql: Add tab-complete for optional view parameters

On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 at 03:42, Shubham Khanna wrote: > > I reviewed the given Patch and it is working fine. > Thanks for checking. Patch pushed. Regards, Dean

Re: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 1:32 PM Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 11:06 AM Masahiko Sawada > wrote: > > > > One month has already been passed since this main patch got committed > > but reading this change, I have some questions on new > >

Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 3:10 PM shveta malik wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:19 PM Drouvot, Bertrand > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On 11/28/23 4:13 AM, shveta malik wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 4:08 PM Amit Kapila > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 2:27 PM Zhijie

Re: SSL tests fail on OpenSSL v3.2.0

> On 28 Nov 2023, at 01:29, Bo Anderson wrote: > It probably doesn’t exist in BoringSSL but neither does a lot of things. Thats not an issue, we don't support building with BoringSSL. -- Daniel Gustafsson

Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings

On 27/11/2023 01:43, Alexander Korotkov wrote: v61 looks good to me. I'm going to push it as long as there are no objections. This was discussed earlier, but is still present in v61: +/* + * An internal function used by SlruScanDirectory(). + * + * Returns true if a file with a name of a

  1   2   >