Re: Multi-Column List Partitioning

.c:4497 #28 0x008b9699 in BackendRun (port=0x2ecfd00) at postmaster.c:4560 Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 11:05 AM Rajkumar Raghuwanshi < rajkumar.raghuwan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Thanks for the patch, it applied cleanly an

Re: Multi-Column List Partitioning

-> Seq Scan on plt2_p3 t2_3 (11 rows) Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 6:03 PM Nitin Jadhav wrote: > Thanks Rajkumar for testing. > > > I think it should throw an error as the partition by list has only 1 > column but we are giving 2 values.

Re: Multi-Column List Partitioning

lso if you see \d+ showing plt1_p1 partition value as ‘(0001,0001)’ instead of ('0001','0001'). Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 1:52 AM Nitin Jadhav wrote: > > > On PG head + Nitin's v3 patch + Amit's Delta patch. Make check is > failing with be

Getting ERROR "subplan "SubPlan 1" was not initialized" in EXISTS subplan when using for list partition.

0); postgres=# explain (costs off) select count(*) from tbl t1 where (exists(select 1 from tbl t2 where t2.c1 = t1.c2) or c3 < 0); ERROR: subplan "SubPlan 1" was not initialized Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi

Re: Multi-Column List Partitioning

fffd6775f90) at pquery.c:1147 #26 0x0097f3a5 in FillPortalStore (portal=0x1893b40, isTopLevel=true) at pquery.c:1026 #27 0x0097ed11 in PortalRun (portal=0x1893b40, count=9223372036854775807, isTopLevel=true, run_once=true, dest=0x1a0c0b8, altdest=0x1a0c0b8, qc=0x7fffd6776150) at pque

Re: Multi-Column List Partitioning

| 1 | | f (2 rows) I think this update should fail as there is no partition satisfying update row (1,NULL,true). Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 12:53 PM Nitin Jadhav wrote: > > + * isnulls is an array of boolean-tuples with key->partnatts bool

Re: recovering from "found xmin ... from before relfrozenxid ..."

e functions on the same tuple repeatedly and see the > behaviour. > > ... > > -- > With Regards, > Ashutosh Sharma > EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi

Re: recovering from "found xmin ... from before relfrozenxid ..."

. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 1:42 PM Masahiko Sawada < masahiko.saw...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 at 22:42, Ashutosh Sharma > wrote: > > > > Hi Robert, > > > > Thanks for the review. Please find my com

Getting ERROR with FOR UPDATE/SHARE for partitioned table.

l SET c2='aa' WHERE CURRENT OF cur" PL/pgSQL function func(integer) line 10 at SQL statement Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 1:47 PM Asif Rehman wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 11:43 AM Rajkumar Raghuwanshi < > rajkumar.raghuwan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 7:48 PM Asif Rehman >> wrote: >> >&

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 7:48 PM Asif Rehman wrote: > > Hi Dipesh, > > The rebased and updated patch is attached. Its rebased to (9f2c4ede). > Make is failing for v15 patch. gcc -std=gnu99 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Werror=vla -Wendif-labels

Re: create partition table caused server crashed with self-referencing foreign key

Thanks all for quick fix and push. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 4:14 PM Ahsan Hadi wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 2:45 PM amul sul wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 2:59 PM amul sul wrote: >> >>&

create partition table caused server crashed with self-referencing foreign key

v=0x2f14240) at postmaster.c:1400 #18 0x007999cc in main (argc=3, argv=0x2f14240) at main.c:210 Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi

Re: ERROR: could not open file "pg_tblspc/ issue with replication setup.

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 9:51 AM Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 01:56:47PM +0530, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi wrote: > > While testing for a feature I got this tablespace related error while > > running script. > > Primary and standby are running on the sam

ERROR: could not open file "pg_tblspc/ issue with replication setup.

ng command and script which help to reproduce it. [edb@localhost bin]$ while sh pg_tblsp_wal.sh; do :; done Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi pg_tblsp_wal.sh Description: application/shellscript

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

ot on disk --without parallel backup [edb@localhost bin]$ ./pg_basebackup -p 5432 -D /tmp/test_bkp/bkp1 -T /tmp/test_bkp/tblsp1=/tmp/test_bkp/tblsp3 -j 1 [edb@localhost bin]$ ./pg_verifybackup /tmp/test_bkp/bkp1 backup successfully verified Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Wed,

Re: variation of row_number with parallel

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:39 AM Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > út 14. 4. 2020 v 5:59 odesílatel Rajkumar Raghuwanshi < > rajkumar.raghuwan...@enterprisedb.com> napsal: > >> Hi, >> >> I have observed row_number() is giving different results when query >>

variation of row_number with parallel

s=# select e.c2, row_number() over () from tbl1 d, tbl2 e where d.c1=e.c3; c2 | row_number -+ 100 | 1 100 | 2 100 | 3 *200 | 4* 100 | 5 (5 rows) Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

feaa6fb968) at pg_basebackup.c:2526 Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 11:07 PM Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:25 PM Asif Rehman wrote: > > I will, however parallel backup is already quite a large patch. So I > think we should first >

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

st bin]$ ./pg_ctl -D /home/edb/Desktop/backup1/ -o "-p 5438" start pg_ctl: directory "/home/edb/Desktop/backup1" is not a database cluster directory Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 6:28 PM Ahsan Hadi wrote: > > >

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

Thanks Asif, I have re-verified reported issue. expect standby backup, others are fixed. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:04 PM Asif Rehman wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 12:22 PM Rajkumar Raghuwanshi < > rajkumar.raghuwan...@ente

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

ckupHINT: This means that the backup being taken is corrupt and should not be used. Try taking another online backup.pg_basebackup: removing data directory "/tmp/bkp_s"* #same is working fine without parallel backup [edb@localhost bin]$ ./pg_basebackup -p 5433 -D /tmp/bkp_s --jobs 1 [edb@localhost bin]$

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

VERSION data/pg_tblspc/16384/PG_13_202003051/16385/PG_VERSION [edb@localhost bin]$ ls /tmp/bkp/pg_tblspc/16384/PG_13_202003051/16385/PG_VERSION ls: cannot access /tmp/bkp/pg_tblspc/16384/PG_13_202003051/16385/PG_VERSION: No such file or directory Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Mo

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

ux/x86_64/clone.S:115 (gdb) Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 2:14 PM Jeevan Chalke < jeevan.cha...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Hi Asif, > > >> Thanks Rajkumar. I have fixed the above issues and have rebased the patch >> to the latest master

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:52 AM Asif Rehman wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:08 AM Rajkumar Raghuwanshi < > rajkumar.raghuwan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> Thanks for the patches. >> >> I have verified reported issues with new patches, is

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

or while processing the request. pg_basebackup: removing data directory "/tmp/bkp" Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 9:51 PM Asif Rehman wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 2:38 PM Rajkumar Raghuwanshi < > rajkumar.raghuwan...@enterprisedb

Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

at pg_basebackup.c:3000 #1 0x00408b56 in parallel_backup_run (backupinfo=0x14210a0) at pg_basebackup.c:2739 #2 0x00407955 in BaseBackup () at pg_basebackup.c:2128 #3 0x0040895c in main (argc=7, argv=0x7ffca2910c58) at pg_basebackup.c:2668 (gdb) Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi

Re: backup manifests

]$ vi /tmp/bold/backup_manifest [edb@localhost bin]$ ./pg_validatebackup /tmp/bold pg_validatebackup: error: "global/4183" has size 0 on disk but size *18446744073709551615* in the manifest Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 9:37 AM Suraj Kharage wrot

Re: block-level incremental backup

is working with incremental backup. A minor comment : It is mentioned in pg_combinebackup help that maximum 10 incremental backup can be given with -i option, but I found maximum 9 incremental backup directories can be given at a time. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corpora

getting ERROR "relation 16401 has no triggers" with partition foreign key alter

; ERROR: relation 16395 has no triggers Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: Postgres 11: Table Partitioning and Primary Keys

On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 8:29 AM Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 10:37:37PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 09:20:07PM +, PG Doc comments form wrote: > >> In the documentation for Postgres 11 table partitioning, there is no > mention > >> of the

Statistical aggregate functions are not working with PARTIAL aggregation

l reported test case and discussion can be found at below link. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAKcux6%3DuZEyWyLw0N7HtR9OBc-sWEFeByEZC7t-KDf15FKxVew%40mail.gmail.com Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 5:26 PM Jeevan Chalke wrote: &

Statistical aggregate functions are not working with partitionwise aggregate

, a) FROM tbl; regr_count 0 (1 row) postgres=# SELECT regr_avgx(b, a), regr_avgy(b, a) FROM tbl; regr_avgx | regr_avgy ---+--- | (1 row) postgres=# SELECT corr(b, a) FROM tbl; corr -- (1 row) Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi

Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm for partition-wise join

006 patch] [1] and found no more issue. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB. [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFjFpReKuV_4LRRfdy80BqX8oZfwbo%2BHWLQNv3CsJ5iGPSyTfA%40mail.gmail.com <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2Bq6zcU3X4%3DBfqnWXAUPBFtKK7vy0HO7-%2B

Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm for partition-wise join

ing_side_outer = false argument value which fails to set merged_index. > > In the attached patch, I tried to fix this case by setting merged_index > explicitly which fixes the reported crash. > Thanks Amul, with v20 patches, crash is fixed. > > Regards, > Amul > > > >&g

Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm for partition-wise join

t1.c GROUP BY t1.c, t2.c, t3.c ORDER BY t1"..., params=0x0, queryEnv=0x0) at explain.c:364 Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB. > Regards, > Amul Sul > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 11:05 AM amul sul wrote: > >> There are few whitespaces in 000

Re: Getting ERROR: could not open file "base/13164/t3_16388" with partition table with ON COMMIT

On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 5:49 AM Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 04:39:07PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > > Agreed that they're two independent issues, although it wouldn't be such > a > > bad idea to fix them in one go, as they're both issues related to the > > handling of ON

pg_upgrade failed with ERROR: null relpartbound for relation 18159 error.

quot;public"."partkey_t" ATTACH PARTITION "public"."partkey_t_1" FOR VALUES FROM (0) TO (1000); -- For binary upgrade, set heap's relfrozenxid and relminmxid UPDATE pg_catalog.pg_class SET relfrozenxid = '1915', relminmxid = '1' WHERE oid = '"public"."partkey_t_1"'::pg_catalog.regclass; Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: Multiple primary key on partition table?

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 11:20 AM amul sul wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 9:06 PM amul sul wrote: > > > > Nice catch Rajkumar. > > > > In index_check_primary_key(), relationHasPrimaryKey() called only for > the an > > alter command but I think we need to call in this case as well, like > this:

Re: Getting ERROR: could not open file "base/13164/t3_16388" with partition table with ON COMMIT

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2018/09/13 23:13, Tom Lane wrote: > > Amit Langote writes: > >> On 2018/09/13 1:14, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> That seems excessively restrictive. Anything that has storage (e.g. > >>> matviews) ought to be truncatable, no? > > > >> Not by

Multiple primary key on partition table?

inary upgrade, must preserve pg_class oids SELECT pg_catalog.binary_upgrade_set_next_index_pg_class_oid('16394'::pg_catalog.oid); ALTER TABLE ONLY "public"."t1_p1" ADD CONSTRAINT "t1_p1_pkey1" PRIMARY KEY ("b"); Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Getting ERROR: could not open file "base/13164/t3_16388" with partition table with ON COMMIT

ELETE ROWS; ERROR: could not open file "base/13164/t3_16388": No such file or directory Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

cache lookup failed for constraint when alter table referred by partition table

REFERENCES non_part(a)) PARTITION BY RANGE(a); CREATE TABLE postgres=# CREATE TABLE part_p1 PARTITION OF part FOR VALUES FROM (MINVALUE) TO (MAXVALUE); CREATE TABLE postgres=# ALTER TABLE non_part ALTER COLUMN a TYPE bigint; *ERROR: cache lookup failed for constraint 16398* Thanks & Reg

negative bitmapset member not allowed Error with partition pruning

.tableoid)::regclass), part_p1.a, part_p1.b -> Append -> Seq Scan on part_p1 Filter: (a IS NULL) -> Seq Scan on part_p2_p1 Filter: (a IS NULL) (7 rows) postgres=# Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: Test patch for partitionwise join with partitioned tables containing default partition

Thanks for commit Jeff. Thanks for review Ashutosh, Thomas. commit 4513d3a4be0bb7d0141f8b7eaf669a55c08e41b0 Author: Jeff Davis Date: Thu Jul 5 18:56:12 2018 -0700 Add test for partitionwise join involving default partition. Author: Rajkumar Raghuwanshi Reviewed-by: Ashutosh Bapat

Re: Server crashed with "TRAP: unrecognized TOAST vartag("1", File: "heaptuple.c", Line: 1490)"

On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 4:30 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2018-Jun-28, Andres Freund wrote: > > > On 2018-06-28 22:35:11 +0530, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Andres Freund > wrote: > > > > On 2018-06-28 16:08:

Re: Server crashed with "TRAP: unrecognized TOAST vartag("1", File: "heaptuple.c", Line: 1490)"

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > On 2018-06-28 16:08:31 +0530, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi wrote: > > I am getting server crash with below test case, logfile message and core > > dump details in the mail. > > Which versions are affected

Server crashed with "TRAP: unrecognized TOAST vartag("1", File: "heaptuple.c", Line: 1490)"

query_string=0x1eb8798 "ALTER TABLE part_tbl ALTER COLUMN c TYPE numeric;") at postgres.c:1122 #26 0x008c9dd2 in PostgresMain (argc=1, argv=0x1ee22a0, dbname=0x1ee2100 "postgres", username=0x1eb5298 "edb") at postgres.c:4153 #27 0x00827467 in BackendRun (port=0x1eda060) at postmaster.c:4361 Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: alter index WITH ( storage_parameter = value [, ... ] ) for partition index.

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:07 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:51:23AM +0530, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi wrote: > > postgres=# select pgstatindex('part_pk'); > > ERROR: relation "part_pk" is not a btree index > > This error message is intention

Re: alter index WITH ( storage_parameter = value [, ... ] ) for partition index.

row) postgres=# select pgstatindex('part_pk'); ERROR: relation "part_pk" is not a btree index postgres=# Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi < rajkumar.raghuwan...@enterprisedb.com> wrot

unexpected relkind: 73 ERROR with partition table index

postgres=> ALTER INDEX part_idx RENAME TO part_idx_renamed; ERROR: unexpected relkind: 73 Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: partition table and stddev() /variance() behaviour

Thanks for commit. I have verified reported case. it is fixed now. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 8:38 AM, David Rowley wrote: > On 22 June 2018 at 03:30, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I think some coverage of the nume

Re: ERROR: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist

Thanks for commit. I have verified reported case. it is fixed now. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 1:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > Thanks for the report. I traced through this, and the

Re: server crashed with TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(!parallel_aware || pathnode->path.parallel_safe)"

Thanks for commit. I have verified reported case. it is fixed now. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 7:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Amit Kapila writes: > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Amit Khandekar > wrote: > &

Re: Server crashed with TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(parallel_workers > 0)" when partitionwise_aggregate true.

I agree with his suggestion and updated my patch accordingly. > I have applied patch and checked reported issue. Patch applied cleanly and issues not reproducible any more. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

partition table and stddev() /variance() behaviour

) FROM part; * count | stddev | variance ---++- 4 | 7.0237691685684926 | 49.(1 row)* Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

ERROR: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist

ssion not found in targetlist Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Server crashed with TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(parallel_workers > 0)" when partitionwise_aggregate true.

c:4361 #22 0x00825e71 in BackendStartup (port=0x1c8a060) at postmaster.c:4033 #23 0x00822253 in ServerLoop () at postmaster.c:1706 #24 0x00821b85 in PostmasterMain (argc=3, argv=0x1c631f0) at postmaster.c:1379 #25 0x00748d64 in main (argc=3, argv=0x1c631f0) at main.c:228 Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Getting "ERROR: did not find all requested child rels in append_rel_list" when enable_partition_pruning is on

1 >= c2); c1 | c2 + (0 rows) postgres=# postgres=# set enable_partition_pruning to on; SET postgres=# select * from (select * from test a union all select * from test b) ss where (c1 >= c2); ERROR: did not find all requested child rels in append_rel_list Thanks & Regards, R

server crashed with TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(!parallel_aware || pathnode->path.parallel_safe)"

d9 in PostmasterMain (argc=3, argv=0x26c01f0) at postmaster.c:1379 #18 0x000000748cb8 in main (argc=3, argv=0x26c01f0) at main.c:228 Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

ntile() throws ERROR when hashagg is false

Group Key: a -> Sort (cost=83.37..86.37 rows=1200 width=4) Sort Key: a -> Seq Scan on foo (cost=0.00..22.00 rows=1200 width=4) (6 rows) postgres=# select ntile(a) OVER () from foo GROUP BY a; ERROR: argument of ntile must be greater than zero Thanks &

Server crashed with dense_rank on partition table.

2ad060) at postmaster.c:4033 #32 0x00822047 in ServerLoop () at postmaster.c:1706 #33 0x00821979 in PostmasterMain (argc=3, argv=0x12861f0) at postmaster.c:1379 #34 0x00748bc4 in main (argc=3, argv=0x12861f0) at main.c:228 Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: Test patch for partitionwise join with partitioned tables containing default partition

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Ashutosh Bapat < ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Thanks Rajkumar for starting a new thread. Please update the > commitfest entry as well. > I have attached new thread in commitfest and detached the old one. Thanks & Regards, Rajku

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Ashutosh Bapat < ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 8:11 AM, Thomas Munro > wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi > > wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:00 PM, Ashutosh

Test patch for partitionwise join with partitioned tables containing default partition

-OntTBOEEaUGTg%40mail.gmail.com As found by Thomas, The regression test currently fails with v4 patch because a redundant Result node has been removed from a query plan. here is the updated v5 patch fixing this. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation diff --git a/src/

Re: New committers announced at PGCon 2018

Congratulations Everyone :) Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 10:55 PM, MauMau wrote: > From: Tom Lane > The core team is pleased to announce the appointment of seven > new Postgres committers: > > > Congratulati

Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 1:04 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Great. Committed 0001. Are you planning any further testing of this > patch series? Sorry I missed the mail. Yes, I have further tested patches and find no more issues. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:00 PM, Ashutosh Bapat < ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi > <rajkumar.raghuwan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > updated test patch attached. > Changed partition-wise statement to parti

Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL

3-01 18:38:38.726 IST [51712] LOG: redo done at 0/1669420 2018-03-01 18:38:38.726 IST [51712] LOG: last completed transaction was at log time 2018-03-01 18:38:36.53573+05:30 2018-03-01 18:38:38.744 IST [50071] LOG: database system is ready to accept connections Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: server crash in nodeAppend.c

ne now. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE of partition key

to me. I have marked it as > Ready For Committer. > I too have tested this feature with isolation framework and this look good to me. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: parallel append vs. simple UNION ALL

42.345 IST [43508] LOG: server process (PID 43519) was terminated by signal 6: Aborted 2018-02-26 22:06:42.345 IST [43508] DETAIL: Failed process was running: SELECT * FROM information_schema.foreign_data_wrapper_options ORDER BY 1, 2, 3; Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning

t;) at postgres.c:4144 #37 0x00812afa in BackendRun (port=0x2588ea0) at postmaster.c:4412 #38 0x00000081226e in BackendStartup (port=0x2588ea0) at postmaster.c:4084 */ Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning

ppend (cost=0.00..46.00 rows=12 width=6) -> Seq Scan on part_p11 (cost=0.00..46.00 rows=12 width=6) Filter: ((c2 >= '1998-01-01'::date) AND (c2 <= '1999-01-01'::date)) (3 rows) postgres=# execute RTP; *ERROR: partition missing from Append subplans* deallocate RTP; DROP TA

Expression errors with "FOR UPDATE" and postgres_fdw with partition wise join enabled.

(VERBOSE, COSTS OFF) SELECT t1.c1, ss.a, ss.b FROM (SELECT c1 FROM pt1) t1 INNER JOIN (SELECT t2.c1, t3.c1 FROM (SELECT c1 FROM pt1) t2 FULL JOIN (SELECT c1 FROM pt1) t3 ON (t2.c1 = t3.c1)) ss(a, b) ON (TRUE) ORDER BY t1.c1, ss.a, ss.b FOR UPDATE OF t1; ERROR: variable not found in subplan target lis

Re: Query running for very long time (server hanged) with parallel append

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Attached is a patch that fixes this issue on the above lines. > Patch applied cleanly and work fine for me. mentioned issue is not reproducible now. Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwansh

Multi-level hierarchy with parallel append can lead to an extra subplan.

on rm38941_union_t1 (7 rows) postgres=# SELECT AVG(c1),SUM(c2) FROM (SELECT c1,c2 FROM RM38941_union_t2 UNION ALL SELECT c1,c2 FROM RM38941_inherit UNION ALL SELECT c1,c2 FROM RM38941_union_t1)UA; avg | sum --+--- 248.6917040358744395 | 55083 (1 row) Th

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Ashutosh Bapat < ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Thanks. Here are some comments > > Thanks Ashutosh for review and suggestions. > +-- test default partition behavior for range > +ALTER TABLE prt1 DETACH PARTITION prt1_p3; > +ALTER TABLE prt1 ATTACH

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar.raghuwan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Ashutosh Bapat > <ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> I agree, the patch looks longer than expected. I think, it's important &

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

very partitioned relation; adding to one of them would be > enough. May be add it to the parent, but that too can be avoided. That > would reduce the size of patch a bit. Thanks Ashutosh for suggestions. I have reduced test cases as suggested. Attaching updated patch. Thanks & Regards, R

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise aggregation/grouping

c | c | count --+--+--- | | 1 0004 | 0004 | 1 (2 rows) Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation

rgc=3, argv=0x2630180) at postmaster.c:1365 #23 0x0072cb40 in main (argc=3, argv=0x2630180) at main.c:228 Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation

Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning

ly means the server terminated abnormally before or while processing the request. The connection to the server was lost. Attempting reset: Failed. !> Thanks & Regards, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation