Hi
I read notes from the FOSDEM developer meeting, and I would like to repeat
notice about motivation for introduction of session variables, and one
reason why session_variables are not transactional, and why they should not
be replaced by temp tables is performance.
There are more use cases
>
> > I can be wrong, but from these numbers I don't think so these sync cycles
> > should to contain CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> Well, there is always possibility someone will create more variables
> than any arbitrary limit we have tested for. But I see your point and
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 07:09:27PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> po 23. 1. 2023 v 15:25 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>
> napsal:
>
> > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 07:47:07PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > > pá 20. 1. 2023 v 21:35 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>
po 23. 1. 2023 v 15:25 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>
napsal:
> > On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 07:47:07PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > pá 20. 1. 2023 v 21:35 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>
> > napsal:
> >
> > > * I think it was already mentioned in the thread,
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 07:47:07PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> pá 20. 1. 2023 v 21:35 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>
> napsal:
>
> > * I think it was already mentioned in the thread, there seems to be not a
> > single usage of CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in session_variable.c .
I've accumulated another collection of various questions and comments. As a
side note I'm getting a good feeling about this patch, those part I've read so
far looks good to me.
* I've suddenly realized one could use pseudo types for variables, and
it not always works. E.g.:
=# create
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 08:35:16PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> út 10. 1. 2023 v 3:20 odesílatel Julien Rouhaud napsal:
> >
> > Another new behavior I see is the new rowtype_only parameter for
> > LookupVariable. Has this been discussed?
> >
>
> I think so it was discussed about table shadowing
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 07, 2023 at 08:09:27AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >
> > Hmm, how safe is it for third-party code to access the stored data directly
> > rather than a copy? If it makes extension fragile if they're not careful
> > enough with cache invalidation, or even give them a way to mess
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 08:02:41PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> pá 6. 1. 2023 v 5:11 odesílatel Julien Rouhaud napsal:
>
> >
> > +Datum
> > +GetSessionVariableWithTypeCheck(Oid varid, bool *isNull, Oid
> > expected_typid)
> > +{
> > + SVariable svar;
> > +
> > + svar =
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 08:38:43AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> I am sending an updated patch, fixing the mentioned issue. Big thanks for
> testing, and checking.
There were multiple reviews in the last weeks which reported some issues, but
unless I'm missing something I don't see any
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 08:45:57PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > From the first look it seems some major topics the discussion is evolving
> > are about:
> >
> > * Validity of the use case. Seems to be quite convincingly addressed in
> > [1] and
> > [2].
> >
> > * Complicated logic around
čt 22. 12. 2022 v 17:15 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>
napsal:
> Hi,
>
> I'm continuing review the patch slowly, and have one more issue plus one
> philosophical question.
>
> The issue have something to do with variables invalidation. Enabling
> debug_discard_caches = 1 (about
Hi,
I'm continuing review the patch slowly, and have one more issue plus one
philosophical question.
The issue have something to do with variables invalidation. Enabling
debug_discard_caches = 1 (about which I've learned from this thread) and
running this subset of the test suite:
Op 14-12-2022 om 05:54 schreef Pavel Stehule:
Hi
fresh rebase
typo alert:
v20221214-0003-LET-command.patch contains
errmsg("target session varible is of type %s"
('varible' should be 'variable')
Erik
14 matches
Mail list logo
