On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 4:49 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 4:03 PM John Naylor
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 9:32 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 8:27 PM John Naylor
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 01:09:09AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm confused here, because Horiguchi-san is saying that that
> won't work. I've not checked the code lately, but I think that
> "postgres -C var" prints its results before actually attempting
> to establish shared memory, so I suspect
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 02:02:19PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>> I slightly prefer using a function for this, as if GUC is used, it can
>> only return "unknown" for the command "postgres -C
>> huge_page_active". However, apart from this advantage, I prefer using
>>
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 01:54:46PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> The main advantage of a read-only GUC over a function is that users
> would not need to start a postmaster to know if huge pages would be
> active or not. This is the main reason why a GUC would be a better
> fit, in my opinion,
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 02:02:19PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Regarding huge_page_active, its value remains constant throughout a
> postmaster's lifespan. In this regard, GUC may be a better fit for
> this information. The issue with using GUC for this value is that the
> postgres command
On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 10:27 PM Kumar, Sachin wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a couple of questions.
> >
> > Q1.
> >
> > What happens if the subscriber already has some tables present? For
> > example, I did not see the post saying anything like "Only if the table does
> > not already exist then
Dear Melih,
Thank you for updating the patch.
I checked your added description about initial data sync and I think it's OK.
Few minor comments:
01. copy_table
```
+ List *options = NIL;
```
I found a unnecessary blank just after "List". You can remove it and align
definition.
On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 8:49 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> On 3/18/23 06:35, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 3:13 AM Tomas Vondra
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >> Clearly, for sequences we can't quite rely on snapshots/slots, we need
> >> to get the LSN to decide what changes to
At Sat, 18 Mar 2023 10:08:53 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote in
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 1:06 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 12:20 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> > wrote:
> > > +1 for pg_get_wal_block_info emitting per-record WAL info too along
> > > with block info,
Hi,
On 2023-03-15 20:55:33 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> WIP patch for that attached. There's now
> install-doc-man
> install-doc-html
> run targets and a
> install-docs
> alias target.
>
>
> I did end up getting stuck when hacking on this, and ended up adding css
> support for nochunk
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 3:37 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> There are a couple of TAP tests where the copy binary is expected to
> fail. And when it fails, you do binary=false (changing the format back
> to 'text') so the test is then expected to be able to proceed.
>
> I don't know if this happens in
On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 at 14:58, 席冲(宜穆) wrote:
> I think lock requested only check for conflict with already-held lock, if
> there is no conflict, the lock should be granted.
That would mean that stronger locks such as AEL might never be granted
if there was never any moment when no other
Hello all,
This PostgreSQL version is 11.9.
In LockAcquireExtended(), why if lock requested conflicts with locks requested
by waiters, must join
wait queue. Why does the lock still check for conflict with the lock requested,
rather than check for directly with conflict with the already-held
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 1:10 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Thomas Munro writes:
> > ... I suppose then someone might complain
> > that it should be clearer if a patch hasn't applied for a very long
> > time; suggestions for how to show that are welcome.
>
> Can you make the pop-up tooltip text read
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 20:07 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 11:58 AM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 20:25 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for your comments.
> >
> > > + if (server_version >= 16)
> > > + {
> > > +
On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 11:21:58AM -0700, Soumyadeep Chakraborty wrote:
> Thanks. Fixed and rebased.
I think that I am OK with the concept of this patch to use a
partitioned table's relam as a reference when creating a partition
rather than relying on the default GUC, in a way similar to
Thomas Munro writes:
> ... I suppose then someone might complain
> that it should be clearer if a patch hasn't applied for a very long
> time; suggestions for how to show that are welcome.
Can you make the pop-up tooltip text read "Rebase needed since
-MM-DD"?
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 11:13 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> I realised that part of Alvaro's complaint was probably caused by
> cfbot's refusal to show any useful information just because it
> couldn't apply a patch the last time it tried. A small improvement
> today: now it shows a ♲ symbol (with
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 06:53:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> 9.2 is still within our "supported old versions" window, so it's
> at least plausible that somebody would hit this for KRB5. Still,
> the net effect would be that they'd get "authentication method 2
> not supported" instead of "Kerberos
On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 02:13:45PM +0100, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> On 3/16/23 12:46 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> There is no trace of them.
>> Perhaps the ones exposted through pg_stat_xact_all_tables are fine if
>> not listed.
>
> I'd be tempted to add documentation for all of them, I can
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 6:46 AM Ants Aasma wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 at 02:29, Melanie Plageman
> wrote:
> > As for routine vacuuming and the other buffer access strategies, I think
> > there is an argument for configurability based on operator knowledge --
> > perhaps your workload will
Michael Paquier writes:
> $subject has been discussed here, still seems worth its own thread for
> clarity:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4037249.1679011...@sss.pgh.pa.us
> Support for Kerberos v4 has been removed in a159ad3 (2005) and the
> same happened for v5 in 98de86e (2014,
Thanks for the review!
Attached is an updated v6.
v6 has some updates and corrections. It has two remaining TODOs in the
code: one is around what value to initialize the ring_size to in
VacuumParams, the other is around whether or not parallel vacuum index
workers should in fact stick with the
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 12:19:56PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Rebased to latest Head.
I was looking at this thread, and echoing Daniel's and Alvaro's
arguments, I don't quite see why this patch is something we need. I
would recommend to mark it as rejected and move on.
--
Michael
Hi all,
$subject has been discussed here, still seems worth its own thread for
clarity:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4037249.1679011...@sss.pgh.pa.us
Support for Kerberos v4 has been removed in a159ad3 (2005) and the
same happened for v5 in 98de86e (2014, meaning that this is still
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 12:44 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 04:28:02PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 4:19 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > The only issue with this is that cfbot has squished all the commits into
> > > one, and lost the original commit
There are a couple of TAP tests where the copy binary is expected to
fail. And when it fails, you do binary=false (changing the format back
to 'text') so the test is then expected to be able to proceed.
I don't know if this happens in practice, but IIUC in theory, if the
timing is extremely bad,
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 08:10:10PM +0100, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
> My approach was trying to make something minimal so it could be
> backpatchable. This looks fine for HEAD, but are you planning on something
> similar for the other branches?
Yes. This is actually not invasive down to
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 5:13 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
>Did you actually write "if TIMESTAMP_IS_NOBEGIN(dt2)" and not
>"if (TIMESTAMP_IS_NOBEGIN(dt2))"? If the former, I'm not surprised
>that pgindent gets confused. The parentheses are required by the
>C standard. Your code might
Joseph Koshakow writes:
> I must have been doing something wrong because I tried again today and
> it worked fine. However, I go get a lot of changes like the following:
> - if TIMESTAMP_IS_NOBEGIN(dt2)
> - ereport(ERROR,
> -
>
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 17.03.23 15:38, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Simplify find_my_exec by using realpath(3)
>> The problem with this one is that Peter would like it to do something
>> other than what I think it should do. Not sure how to resolve that.
> I have no objection to changing the
On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 3:55 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
>Joseph Koshakow writes:
>> On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 3:08 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>>> More specifically, those are from running pg_indent with an obsolete
>>> typedefs list.
>
>> I must be doing something wrong because even after
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, passed
Documentation:tested, failed
Feature is clearly missing with partition handling in
ne 19. 3. 2023 v 15:01 odesílatel Justin Pryzby
napsal:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 01:05:41PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > rebase + enhancing about related option from a563c24
>
> Thanks.
>
> It looks like this doesn't currently handle extensions, which were added
> at 6568cef26e.
>
> > +
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 05:41:11PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >> * Patch 2 is worth considering to backpatch
>
> I'm not quite sure what exactly are the numbered patches, as some of the
> threads had a number of different patch ideas, and I'm not sure which
> one was/is the most promising one.
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 12:45 PM Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
> In short, I was thinking among the lines of something like the
> attached, where I have invented a pgwin32_get_file_type() that acts as
> a wrapper of GetFileType() in a new file called win32common.c, with
> all the error handling we
Alexander Lakhin writes:
> Please look at the function _readA_Const() (introduced in a6bc33019), which
> fails on current master under valgrind:
> ...
> Here _readA_Const() performs:
> union ValUnion *tmp = nodeRead(NULL, 0);
> memcpy(_node->val, tmp,
On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 6:47 PM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 1:14 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 8:11 AM Melanie Plageman
> > wrote:
> > > > > Also not sure how the patch interacts with failsafe autovac and
> > > > > parallel
> > > > > vacuum.
> > >
On 2023-03-18 Sa 21:32, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 2023-03-18 Sa 19:00, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2023-03-18 17:53:38 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 2023-03-11 Sa 16:25, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2023-03-09 18:31:10 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Another thing: the test for uuid.h is
On 17.03.23 15:38, Tom Lane wrote:
Simplify find_my_exec by using realpath(3)
The problem with this one is that Peter would like it to do something
other than what I think it should do. Not sure how to resolve that.
I have no objection to changing the internal coding of the current
On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 01:05:41PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> rebase + enhancing about related option from a563c24
Thanks.
It looks like this doesn't currently handle extensions, which were added
at 6568cef26e.
> + table_and_children: tables, works like
> + -t/--table,
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 08:04:32PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 02:14:17PM -0400, Gregory Stark (as CFM) wrote:
> > So I was seeing that this patch needs a rebase according to cfbot.
>
> Yeah, folks are getting up to speed in with pgss improvements recently.
> Thanks
Hello,
26.09.2022 17:46, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 22.09.22 23:21, Tom Lane wrote:
Anyway, this is a bit far afield from the stated topic of this
thread. I think we should commit something approximately like
what I posted and then start a new thread specifically about
what we'd like to do
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 08:20:27PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I am not sure, TBH. As presented, the two GetFileType() calls in
> _pgftello64() and _pgfseeko64() ignore the case where it returns
> FILE_TYPE_UNKNOWN and GetLastError() has something else than
> NO_ERROR. The code would return
Hi,
I observed absurd behaviour while using pg_logical_slot_peek_changes()
and pg_logical_slot_get_changes(). Whenever any of these two functions
are called to read the changes using a decoder plugin, the following
messages are printed in the log for every single such call.
2023-03-19
On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 10:08:44AM +0100, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
> IDK, this is just looking for the good case, anything else we'll fail with
> ESPIPE or EINVAL anyway. If we want to get the proper file type we can call
> fstat(), which has the full logic.
I am not sure, TBH. As
Hello everyone and Tom.
Tom, this is about your idea (1) from 2010 to replace spinlock with a
memory barrier in a known assignment xids machinery.
It was mentioned by you again in (2) and in (3) we have decided to
extract this change into a separate commitfest entry.
So, creating it here with a
On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 at 15:09, David Rowley wrote:
> Using the tests mentioned in [1], I tested out
> remove_HeapScanDescData_rs_inited_field.patch. It's not looking very
> promising at all.
In light of the performance regression from removing the rs_inited
field, let's just forget doing that for
I see the PlaceHolderVar issue turned out to be a pre-existing bug after all.
Rebased version attached.
Regards,
Dean
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml
new file mode 100644
index b87ad5c..1482ede
--- a/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml
@@ -396,8 +396,8
49 matches
Mail list logo
