Re: CREATEROLE users vs. role properties

2023-01-24 Thread tushar
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 10:28 PM Robert Haas wrote: > > In previous releases, you needed to have CREATEROLE in order to be > able to perform user management functions. In master, you still need > CREATEROLE, and you also need ADMIN OPTION on the role. In this > scenario, only t1 meets those

Re: CREATEROLE users vs. role properties

2023-01-23 Thread tushar
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 8:34 PM Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 6:15 AM tushar > wrote: > > postgres=# create role fff with createrole; > > CREATE ROLE > > postgres=# create role xxx; > > CREATE ROLE > > postgres=# set role fff; > > SET >

Re: almost-super-user problems that we haven't fixed yet

2023-01-20 Thread tushar
On 1/19/23 6:28 PM, tushar wrote: There is  one typo , for the doc changes, it is  mentioned "pg_use_reserved_backends" but i think it supposed to be "pg_use_reserved_connections" under Table 22.1. Predefined Roles. Thanks, this is fixed now with the latest patches

Re: almost-super-user problems that we haven't fixed yet

2023-01-19 Thread tushar
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 6:50 PM tushar wrote: > and in the error message too > > [edb@centos7tushar bin]$ ./psql postgres -U r2 > > psql: error: connection to server on socket "/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432" failed: > FATAL: remaining connection slots are reserv

Re: almost-super-user problems that we haven't fixed yet

2023-01-19 Thread tushar
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 6:28 PM tushar wrote: > On 1/19/23 2:44 AM, Nathan Bossart wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 02:51:38PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > >> Should (nfree < SuperuserReservedBackends) be using <=, or am I > confused? > > I believe < is corr

Re: almost-super-user problems that we haven't fixed yet

2023-01-19 Thread tushar
er of connection slots. I'll create a new thread for this. There is  one typo , for the doc changes, it is  mentioned "pg_use_reserved_backends" but i think it supposed to be "pg_use_reserved_connections" under Table 22.1. Predefined Roles. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: CREATEROLE users vs. role properties

2023-01-19 Thread tushar
On 1/19/23 3:05 PM, tushar wrote: which was working previously without patch. My bad, I was testing against PG v15 but this issue is not reproducible on master (without patch). As you mentioned- "This implements the standard idea that you can't give permissions you don't have (but yo

Re: CREATEROLE users vs. role properties

2023-01-19 Thread tushar
" as user "abc1". postgres=> alter role test1 with createrole ; ERROR:  permission denied postgres=> which was working previously without patch. Is this an expected behavior? -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Getting an error if we provide --enable-tap-tests switch on SLES 12

2023-01-06 Thread tushar
/bin/pg_ctl/../../../src/test/perl /home/runner/edbas/src/bin/pg_ctl Do we have any better option to work without this workaround? You could install the module via cpan :/. Yes, will try to install. Thanks Andres. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise

Getting an error if we provide --enable-tap-tests switch on SLES 12

2023-01-04 Thread tushar
Hi, We found that if we provide *--enable-tap-tests * switch at the time of PG sources configuration, getting this below error " checking for Perl modules required for TAP tests... Can't locate IPC/Run.pm in @INC (you may need to install the IPC::Run module) (@INC contains:

Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option

2022-08-24 Thread tushar
On 8/24/22 12:28 AM, Robert Haas wrote: This patch needed to be rebased pretty extensively after commit ce6b672e4455820a0348214be0da1a024c3f619f. Here is a new version. Thanks, Robert, I have retested this patch with my previous scenarios and things look good to me. -- regards,tushar

Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option

2022-07-28 Thread tushar
and things look good to me. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option

2022-07-28 Thread tushar
uld be ignored and inherit option should remain 'TRUE' as it was before? -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option

2022-07-20 Thread tushar
On 7/19/22 12:56 AM, Robert Haas wrote: Another good catch. Here is v5 with a fix for that problem. Thanks, the issue is fixed now. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option

2022-07-14 Thread tushar
t; WITH  GRANTED BY "edb";          ^ This issue is not reproducible on PG v16 (without patch). -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option

2022-07-12 Thread tushar
On 7/11/22 11:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote: Oops. Here is a rebased version of v3 which aims to fix this bug. Thanks, Issue seems to be fixed with this patch. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option

2022-07-11 Thread tushar
On Sat, Jul 9, 2022 at 1:27 AM Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 8:04 AM Robert Haas wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 3, 2022 at 1:17 PM Nathan Bossart > wrote: > > > If by "bolder" you mean "mark [NO]INHERIT as > deprecated-and-to-be-removed > > > and begin emitting WARNINGs when it and WITH

[v15 beta] pg_upgrade failed if earlier executed with -c switch

2022-06-03 Thread tushar
itdb -D d2) run pg_upgrade with -c option  ( ./pg_upgrade -d d1 -D d2 -b . -B . -c -v) run pg_upgrade without -c option ( ./pg_upgrade -d d1 -D d2 -b . -B .) -- -- -- Error This behavior was not there in earlier released versions, i guess. Is it expected behavior now onwards? -- regards,tushar En

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2022-02-15 Thread tushar
  directory size is  1.6GB --compress=server-gzip:9 = compress  directory size is  1.6GB === -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2022-01-28 Thread tushar
ls /tmp/1 backup_manifest  base.tar.gz -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2022-01-27 Thread tushar
/tmp/10 16384.tar.gz  backup_manifest  base.tar.gz 0 is for no compression so the directory should not be compressed if we mention server-gzip:0 and both these above scenarios should match? -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2022-01-27 Thread tushar
On 1/27/22 2:15 AM, Robert Haas wrote: The attached patch should fix this, too. Thanks, the issues seem to be fixed now. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2022-01-25 Thread tushar
slave mode. if this is not supported then I think we should throw some errors. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2022-01-19 Thread tushar
; write=0.001 s, sync=0.001 s, total=0.046 s; sync files=0, longest=0.000 s, average=0.000 s; distance=16383 kB, estimate=16383 kB pg_basebackup: checkpoint completed NOTICE:  WAL archiving is not enabled; you must ensure that all required WAL segments are copied through other means

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2022-01-05 Thread tushar
On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 1:12 PM Jeevan Ladhe wrote: > Hi Tushar, > > You need to apply Robert's v10 version patches 0002, 0003 and 0004, before > applying the lz4 patch(v8 version). > Please let me know if you still face any issues. > Thanks, Jeevan. I tested —server-compre

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2022-01-05 Thread tushar
emoving -z option  backup is in tar mode only edb@centos7tushar bin]$  ./pg_basebackup -t server:/tmp/test0 -Xfetch [edb@centos7tushar bin]$ ls /tmp/test0 backup_manifest  base.tar -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2022-01-03 Thread tushar
]$ ls foo1 backup_manifest  base.tar.gz  pg_wal.tar if this scenario is valid then both the folders format should be in lz4 format otherwise we should get an error something like - not a valid option ? -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2022-01-03 Thread tushar
ep server-compression   --server-compression=none|gzip|gzip[1-9] -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2021-12-28 Thread tushar
On 12/28/21 1:11 PM, Jeevan Ladhe wrote: You need to apply Robert's v10 version patches 0002, 0003 and 0004, before applying the lz4 patch(v8 version). Thanks, able to apply now. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2021-12-27 Thread tushar
/basebackup.c: patch does not apply error: patch failed: src/include/replication/basebackup_sink.h:285 error: src/include/replication/basebackup_sink.h: patch does not apply -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)

2021-12-15 Thread tushar
On 12/15/21 12:09 AM, tushar wrote: I spent much of today reviewing 0001. Here's an updated version, so far only lightly tested. Please check whether I've broken anything. Thanks Robert, I tested from v96/12/13/v14 -> v15( with patch) things are working fine i.e table /index relfilen

Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)

2021-12-14 Thread tushar
ode is preserved, not changing after pg_upgrade. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

pg_upgrade operation failed if table created in --single user mode

2021-12-14 Thread tushar
lfrozenxid and relminmxid UPDATE pg_catalog.pg_class SET relfrozenxid = '492', relminmxid = '1' WHERE oid = '"public"."r"'::pg_catalog.regclass; Is it expected ? -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB  https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: extensible options syntax for replication parser?

2021-10-13 Thread tushar
have tested couple of scenarios of pg_basebackup / pg_receivewal /pg_recvlogical /  Publication(wal_level=logical) and Subscription e.t.c against HEAD (with patches) and  cross-version testing. Things look good to me and no breakage was found. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https

Re: extensible options syntax for replication parser?

2021-09-27 Thread tushar
://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAC6VRoY3SAFeO7kZ0EOVC6mX%3D1ZyTocaecTDTh209W20KCC_aQ%40mail.gmail.com -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: extensible options syntax for replication parser?

2021-09-27 Thread tushar
the patch then I'm not sure why you are raising it here rather than on the thread where that feature was developed. Right, issue is reproducible on HEAD as well. I should have checked that, sorry about it. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

two_phase commit parameter used in subscription for a publication which is on < 15.

2021-09-27 Thread tushar
--- f (1 row) so are we silently ignoring this parameter as it is not supported on v14 ? and if yes then why not we just throw a message like ERROR: unrecognized subscription parameter: "two_phase" -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: extensible options syntax for replication parser?

2021-09-24 Thread tushar
On 9/24/21 11:57 PM, tushar wrote: postgres=# select two_phase from pg_replication_slots where slot_name='r105'; Correction -Please read  'r105' to 'r1015' -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: extensible options syntax for replication parser?

2021-09-24 Thread tushar
 f (1 row) so are we silently ignoring this parameter as it is not supported on v14RC/HEAD ? and if yes then why not we just throw an message like ERROR:  unrecognized subscription parameter: "two_phase" -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: extensible options syntax for replication parser?

2021-09-24 Thread tushar
, on a clean setup -I am not also not able to reproduce this issue. Thanks for checking at your end. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: extensible options syntax for replication parser?

2021-09-24 Thread tushar
replication slot "from_v14": ERROR: syntax error postgres=# -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: extensible options syntax for replication parser?

2021-09-23 Thread tushar
ERROR:  syntax error -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2021-07-22 Thread tushar
"--server-compression" option  but not with -z  or -Z ? "-t  server" with option "-z"  / or (-Z ) [tushar@localhost bin]$ ./pg_basebackup -t server:/tmp/dataN -Xnone  -z  --no-manifest -p 9033 pg_basebackup: error: only tar mode backups can be compressed Try &qu

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2021-07-19 Thread tushar
to parse the archive pg_basebackup: removing data directory "ccv" --working [edb@centos7tushar bin]$ ./pg_basebackup --server-compression=gzip4 -t   server:/tmp/ccv    -Xnone  -R --no-manifest NOTICE:  all required WAL segments have been archived [edb@centos7tushar bin]$ -- rega

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2021-07-19 Thread tushar
/all_data2 167M    total [edb@0 bin]$ -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: refactoring basebackup.c

2021-07-12 Thread tushar
On 7/8/21 9:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote: Here at last is a new version. Please refer this scenario ,where backup target using --server-compression is closing the server unexpectedly if we don't provide -no-manifest option [tushar@localhost bin]$ ./pg_basebackup --server-compression=gzip4  -t

pg_upgrade is failed for 'plpgsql_call_handler' handler

2021-06-03 Thread tushar
L LANGUAGE "plspl_sm"; is this expected ? -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2020-06-24 Thread tushar
data start) 3.connect to psql (./psql postgres) 4.Fire query (alter system read only;) 5.shutdown the server(./pg_ctl -D data stop) 6.pg_checksums [edb@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./pg_checksums -D data pg_checksums: error: cluster must be shut down [edb@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ Result - (when server

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2020-06-17 Thread tushar
STEM RESET configuration_parameter ALTER SYSTEM RESET ALL How we are going to justify this in help command of ALTER SYSTEM ? 2)When i connected to postgres in a single user mode , i was not able to set the system in read only [edb@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./postgres --single -D data postgres PostgreSQL s

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-04-29 Thread tushar
we should not mix index information while dropping the table and vice versa. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

[pg_dump] 'create index' statement is failing due to search_path is empty

2020-04-28 Thread tushar
ase You are now connected to database "db2" as user "tushar". db2=# \i /tmp/dump.sql SET SET SET SET SET  set_config (1 row) SET SET SET SET CREATE FUNCTION ALTER FUNCTION CREATE FUNCTION ALTER FUNCTION SET SET CREATE TABLE ALTER TABLE ALTER TABLE ALTER TABL

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-04-24 Thread tushar
which i did  successfully [1] postgres=!# -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [IBM z Systems] Getting server crash when jit_above_cost =0

2020-04-22 Thread tushar
, now all the required file have been placed under llvm-toolset-7 directory and things look fine. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

[IBM z Systems] Rpm package issues.

2020-04-22 Thread tushar
PGDG.rhel7.s390x.rpm is not signed PG v11 Package postgresql11-libs-11.6-2PGDG.rhel7.s390x.rpm is not signed 2) Rpm packages are NOT updated . still showing 11.6 and 12.1 version whereas latest released version is 11.7 and 12.2. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The

[IBM z Systems] Getting server crash when jit_above_cost =0

2020-04-21 Thread tushar
e in BackendRun (port=, port=) at postmaster.c:4437 #23 BackendStartup (port=0xa8c4dc10) at postmaster.c:4128 #24 ServerLoop () at postmaster.c:1704 #25 0x8030c89e in PostmasterMain (argc=argc@entry=3, argv=argv@entry=0xa8c00cc0) at postmaster.c:1377 #26 0x800811f4 in main (argc=, argv=

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-04-20 Thread tushar
2 bytes -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

While restoring -getting error if dump contain sql statements generated from generated.sql file

2020-04-14 Thread tushar
( create database x;) connect to database x (\c x ) execute generated.sql file (\i ../../src/test/regress/sql/generated.sql) take the dump of x db (./pg_dump -Fp x > /tmp/t.dump) create another database  (create database y;) Connect to y db (\c y) execute plain dump sql file (\i /tmp/t.dump) -- rega

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-04-13 Thread tushar
On 4/9/20 6:26 PM, 曾文旌 wrote: On 4/7/20 2:27 PM, 曾文旌 wrote: Vacuum full GTT, cluster GTT is already supported in global_temporary_table_v24-pg13.patch. Here , it is skipping GTT postgres=# \c foo You are now connected to database "foo" as user "tushar". foo=# create gl

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-04-13 Thread tushar
On 4/13/20 1:57 PM, 曾文旌 wrote: [tushar@localhost bin]$ tail -20 pg_upgrade_dump_13592.log pg_restore: error: could not execute query: ERROR: pg_type array OID value not set when in binary upgrade mode I found that the regular table also has this problem, I am very unfamiliar with this part

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-04-09 Thread tushar
s REINDEX --reindex GTT table postgres=# REINDEX (VERBOSE) TABLE  gtt; INFO:  index "gtt_pkey" was reindexed DETAIL:  CPU: user: 0.00 s, system: 0.00 s, elapsed: 0.00 s REINDEX C) --Reconnect  to database postgres=# \c You are now connected to database "postgres" as user &qu

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-04-08 Thread tushar
to server using single user mode ( ./postgres --single -D data postgres) and create a global temp table [tushar@localhost bin]$ ./postgres --single -D data1233 postgres PostgreSQL stand-alone backend 13devel backend> create global temp table t(n int); --Press Ctl+D to exit 4)Perform ini

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-04-07 Thread tushar
On 4/7/20 2:27 PM, 曾文旌 wrote: Vacuum full GTT, cluster GTT is already supported in global_temporary_table_v24-pg13.patch. Here , it is skipping GTT postgres=# \c foo You are now connected to database "foo" as user "tushar". foo=# create global temporary table  g123( c1 int

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-27 Thread tushar
with new code. In this below scenario, pg_dump is failing - test=# CREATE database foo; CREATE DATABASE test=# \c foo You are now connected to database "foo" as user "tushar". foo=# CREATE GLOBAL TEMPORARY TABLE bar(c1 bigint, c2 bigserial) on commit PRESERVE rows; C

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-27 Thread tushar
with new code. This error message looks wrong  to me- postgres=# reindex table concurrently t ; ERROR:  cannot create indexes on global temporary tables using concurrent mode postgres=# Better message would be- ERROR:  cannot reindex global temporary tables concurrently -- regards,tushar

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-25 Thread tushar
and with clause at same time postgres=# -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-25 Thread tushar
table  co; REINDEX Case -2 postgres=# reindex database postgres ; WARNING:  global temp table "public.co" skip reindexed REINDEX postgres=# Case 2 should work as similar to Case 1. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-16 Thread tushar
On 3/14/20 2:04 AM, Robert Haas wrote: OK. Done in the attached version Thanks. Verified. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-16 Thread tushar
21 (1 row) select * from l_gtt1; ERROR:  relation "l_gtt1" does not exist LINE 1: select * from l_gtt1; Wenjing With Regards, Prabhat Kumar Sahu EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com <http://www.enterprisedb.com/> -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-13 Thread tushar
On 3/12/20 8:16 PM, tushar wrote: Seems like expected behavior to me. We could consider providing a more descriptive error message, but there's now way for it to work. Right , Error message need to be more user friendly . One scenario which i feel - should error out  even if  -s option

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-13 Thread tushar
scenario - postgres=# create global temp table  tab1 (n int ) with ( on_commit_delete_rows='true'); CREATE TABLE postgres=# insert into tab1 values (1); INSERT 0 1 postgres=# select * from tab1;  n --- (0 rows) postgres=# alter system set max_active_global_temporary_table=0; ALTER SYSTEM p

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-12 Thread tushar
On 3/9/20 10:46 PM, Robert Haas wrote: Seems like expected behavior to me. We could consider providing a more descriptive error message, but there's now way for it to work. Right , Error message need to be more user friendly . -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-09 Thread tushar
--manifest-checksums,will lead to  this  below error [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./pg_basebackup -R -p 9045 --manifest-checksums=SHA224 -D dc1 pg_basebackup: error: could not initiate base backup: ERROR: syntax error pg_basebackup: removing data directory "dc1" [centos@tushar-ldap-

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-09 Thread tushar
'create view' look like we are skipping it ? -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-09 Thread tushar
foo set (on_commit_delete_rows='true'); ALTER TABLE postgres=# -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-05 Thread tushar
I cannot find "max_active_gtt"  GUC . I think you are referring to  "max_active_global_temporary_table" here ? also , would be great  if we can make this error message  user friendly like  - "max connection reached"  rather than memory error -- regards,tushar En

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-05 Thread tushar
There is one small observation if we use slash (/) with option -i then not getting the desired result Steps to reproduce - == [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./pg_basebackup -D test [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ touch test/*pg_notify*/dummy_file --working [centos@tushar-ldap

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-05 Thread tushar
Hi, There is one scenario  where  i somehow able to run pg_validatebackup successfully but when i tried to start the server , it is failing Steps to reproduce - --create 2 base backup directory [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./pg_basebackup -D db1 [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-04 Thread tushar
 n ---  1 (1 row) -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-04 Thread tushar
/test" is present on disk but not in the manifest but if i remove 'PG_13_202002271 ' directory then there is no error [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./pg_validatebackup data pg_validatebackup: * manifest_checksum = 77ddacb4e7e02e2b880792a19a3adf09266dd88553dd15cfd0c22caee7d9cc04 pg_vali

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-04 Thread tushar
Another scenario, in which if we modify Manifest-Checksum" value from backup_manifest file , we are not getting an error [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./pg_validatebackup data/ pg_validatebackup: * manifest_checksum = 28d082921650d0ae881de8ceb122c8d2af5f449f51ecfb446827f7f49f9

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-04 Thread tushar
Hi, Another observation , if i change the ownership of a file which is under global/ directory i.e [root@tushar-ldap-docker global]# chown enterprisedb 2396 and run the pg_validatebackup command, i am getting this message - [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./pg_validatebackup

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-03 Thread tushar
On 3/3/20 4:04 PM, tushar wrote: Thanks Robert.  After applying all the 5 patches (v8-00*) against PG v13 (commit id -afb5465e0cfce7637066eaaaeecab30b0f23fbe3) , There is a scenario where pg_validatebackup is not throwing an error if some file deleted from pg_wal/ folder and  but later

Re: backup manifests

2020-03-03 Thread tushar
pg_validatebackup against  a valid backup_manifest file but data directory path is WRONG [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./pg_basebackup -D bk --manifest-checksums=sha224 [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ cp bk/backup_manifest /tmp/. [centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./pg_validatebackup -m

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-03-02 Thread tushar
mp table foo1(n int) *with (on_commit_delete_rows='true'); * -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-02-25 Thread tushar
) on commit delete rows; CREATE TABLE i think this error message need to be more clear . regards, tushar On 2/25/20 7:19 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote/: út 25. 2. 2020 v 14:36 odesílatel Prabhat Sahu mailto:prabhat.s...@enterprisedb.com>> napsal: Hi All, Please check the below findings

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

2020-02-25 Thread tushar
Hi , pg_upgrade  scenario is failing if database is containing  global temporary table = centos@tushar-ldap-docker bin]$ ./psql postgres psql (13devel) Type "help" for help. postgres=# create global temporary table  t(n int); CREATE TABLE pos

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2019-12-02 Thread tushar
(0001). These patches can be applied on top of the current HEAD and make check should pass. Regards, While doing testing of this feature against v35- patches ( minus 004) on Master , getting crash when user connect to server using single mode and try to perform vacuum (parallel 1 ) o/p tushar

SSL Connection still showing TLSv1.3 even it is disabled in ssl_ciphers

2019-08-05 Thread tushar
n the message. Is this expected ? -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys

2019-07-17 Thread tushar
every time it is creating new files after firing get_changes function I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that pg_logical_slot_get_changes() causes WAL to be written? No, when i said - created new WAL files , i meant -after each pg_bench run NOT after executing  get_changes. -- rega

pg_rewind is failing on PG v12 BETA/PG HEAD

2019-07-17 Thread tushar
ding from last common checkpoint at 0/260 on timeline 1 pg_rewind: Done! -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys

2019-07-12 Thread tushar
pg_ctl -D standby restart -l logsS -c ) .)Check the pg_wal directory size of STANDBY [centos@mail-arts bin]$ du -sch standby/pg_wal/ 127M    standby/pg_wal/ 127M    total [centos@mail-arts bin]$ and if we see the pg_wal files ,it is growing rampant and not reusing. -- regards,tushar Enterp

Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys

2019-07-04 Thread tushar
slot themself rather than automatically removed  as a surprise. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [pg_rewind] cp: cannot stat ‘pg_wal/RECOVERYHISTORY’: No such file or directory

2019-06-12 Thread tushar
for pointing out. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [pg_rewind] cp: cannot stat ‘pg_wal/RECOVERYHISTORY’: No such file or directory

2019-06-05 Thread tushar
Hi, Is anyone able to reproduce this one ? Any pointer to solve this would be helpful. regards, On 05/27/2019 07:27 PM, tushar wrote: Hi, I am getting this below error - after performing pg_rewind when i try to start new slave ( which earlier was my master) against PGv12 Beta1. &quo

[pg_rewind] cp: cannot stat ‘pg_wal/RECOVERYHISTORY’: No such file or directory

2019-05-27 Thread tushar
] FATAL:  could not connect to the primary server: FATAL:  the database system is starting up cp: cannot stat ‘pg_wal/RECOVERYHISTORY’: No such file or directory .cp: cannot stat ‘pg_wal/RECOVERYXLOG’: No such file or directory Is there anything i need to change/add  to make it work ? Thanks

Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys

2019-04-11 Thread tushar
On 04/10/2019 09:39 PM, Andres Freund wrote: Have you reproduced this with Amit's latest version? Yes-it is very much reproducible. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys

2019-04-10 Thread tushar
On 03/13/2019 08:40 PM, tushar wrote: Hi , I am getting a server crash on standby while executing pg_logical_slot_get_changes function   , please refer this scenario Master cluster( ./initdb -D master) set wal_level='hot_standby in master/postgresql.conf file start the server , connect

Re: [PG 9.6]make is failing for test_decoding contrib module.

2019-03-29 Thread tushar
On 03/29/2019 06:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote: Kashif Jeeshan? Ohh, Please read - Kashif Zeeshan.  Sorry for the typo. -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [PG 9.6]make is failing for test_decoding contrib module.

2019-03-29 Thread tushar
On 03/29/2019 06:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 8:24 AM tushar wrote: Found by one of the my colleague - Kashif Jeeshan , in PG 9.6 - make is Kashif Jeeshan? :-) , actually he is also working  on logical replication on standbys testing - whenever he has some bandwidth

[PG 9.6]make is failing for test_decoding contrib module.

2019-03-29 Thread tushar
: *** [test_decoding.o] Error 1 [centos@centos-cpula test_decoding]$ -- regards,tushar EnterpriseDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

  1   2   >