gers:" would be
enough, although I am inclined to think it needs exposure at the \d
level. One other thing to consider is firing order of said triggers...
if all parent level triggers fire before child level triggers then the
above separation is straightforward, but if the execution order is, as
I suspect, mixed, then it becomes more complicated.
Robert Treat
http://xzilla.net
isvalid as a
means for determining if an index could be safely removed (for the
record, I did not recommend it ;-)
DBA's are often willing to weedwhacker at things in SQL when the
alternative is to learn C.
Robert Treat
http://xzilla.net
h as the recent WITH ... MATERIALIZED change. Thoughts?
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
subscriber. Attached is a patch that attempts to clarify this, and
provides some additional wordsmithing of that section. Patch is
against head but the nature of the patch would apply to the docs for
11 and 10, which both have the incorrect information as well, even if
the patch itself does not.
Robert T
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 7:19 PM Euler Taveira wrote:
>
> Em seg, 8 de abr de 2019 às 19:38, Robert Treat escreveu:
> >
> > I noticed that the docs currently state "A different order of columns
> > in the target table is allowed, but the column types have to match.&qu
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 3:32 PM Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>
> Sorry for late reply,
>
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 7:12 PM Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 8:46 PM Robert Treat wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 8:18 AM Magnus Hag
1
(or maybe null) for checksum failures for cases when checksums are not
enabled. This seems a little more complicated to set up, but seems
like it might ward off people thinking they are safe due to no
checksum error reports when they actually aren't.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 1:25 PM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
>
> On 2019-04-12 19:52, Robert Treat wrote:
> > It is clear to me that the docs are wrong, but I don't see anything
> > inherently incorrect about the code itself. Do you have suggestions
> > for how you would like
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 9:07 AM Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 1:55 PM Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 5:39 PM Robert Treat wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 3:32 PM Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> >> >
&g
are non-existent, which doesn't
seem right either; so how do we explain to people how to measure the
overhead for them?
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
out the network at
https://www.oftc.net
Robert Treat
PostgreSQL Project SPI Liaison
https://xzilla.net
tovac_balance_cost() and signalling the autovacuum
> backend to run the adjustment every few seconds once we are in the danger
> zone.
>
That patch certainly looks interesting; many many times I've had to
have people kick off manual vacuums to use more i/o and kill the
wrap-around vacuum. Reading the discussion there, I wonder if we
should think about weighting the most urgent vacuum at the expense of
other potential autovacuums, although I feel like they often come in
bunches in these scenarios.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
nce would be more grammatically correct
if the word "which" was replaced with "that", ie. PostgreSQL provides
a set of default roles /that/ provide access to certain, commonly
needed, privileged capabilities and information.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
ntly
> across code comments.
>
Heh, that's interesting, as I would have said that CreateCheckpoint is
the right casing vs CreateCheckPoint, but it looks like it has always
been the other way (according to
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=f0e37a85319e6c113ecd3303cdd
called a Hot Standby server. See for
+ it is called a hot standby server. See for
more information.
A standby server can also be used for read-only queries, in which case
- it is called a Hot Standby server. See for
+ it is called a hot standby server. See
for
more information.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
changed and I think I mentioned that in an >>earlier
> >>Email. Are you suggesting to change all at once? I wanted to start with the
> >>documentation and then continue with the other >>places.
>
> >Attached a new version which also modifies amcheck
fail if the specified schema didn't exist. That's arguably
> preferable, but that's the pre-existing behavior for tables. So I think the
> behavior of my patch is more consistent.
>
> +1
>
+1 for consistency.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
sstimate % of frozen tables (like live vs dead tuples in
pg_stat_all_tables), but this seems difficult to maintain accurately.
Had a similar thing with tracking clock time of vacuums; just keeping
the duration of the last vacuum ended up being insufficient for some
cases, so we ended up tracking it historically... we haven't quite yet
designed a pg_stat_vacuums a la pg_stat_statements, but it has crossed
our minds.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
read.
>
While I agree on the above points, IMHO I don't believe it should be a
show-stopper for adding this functionality to v15, but we have a few
more commitments before we get to that point.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
Howdy folks,
The attached patch tweaks the wording around finding the psqlrc file
on windows, with the primary goal of removing the generally incorrect
statement that windows has no concept of a home directory.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
windows-psqlrc.patch
Description: Binary data
ece of software which is
> kept in the Postgres repository but can be optionally installed. pageinspect
> (possibly with the URL) is clear enough. However, if you don't like the
> shorthand, 'pageinspect extension' or 'pageinspect module' are good options.
>
+1 on this line of thinking from my pov.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
ulated with a special value :-(
I think the simplest fix which should correspond to existing versions
behavior would be to just ensure that we replace any "special value"
timestamps with a real transaction timestamp, and then maybe note that
these fields may be advanced by operations which don't strictly show
up as a sequential or index scan.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
hacking Postgres:
http://blog.cleverelephant.ca/2022/10/postgresql-links.html
* I suspect you may have seen these, but in case not, the wiki has
several key pages to be aware of, which are linked to from
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Development_information
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 11:02 AM Simon Riggs
wrote:
>
> On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 at 02:08, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 05:46:55PM -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 3:51 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > Attached
ease there's a non-numeric "minor release".
> > I'm inclined to go ahead and do it like that.
>
> I decided that what I found jarring about that was the use of "release
> number" with a non-numeric version, so I changed it to "release
> identifier" and pushed.
>
Looks good. Thanks Tom / Julien.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
ew.
+
Transactions that are currently prepared can be inspected using the
pg_prepated_xacts view.
* I thought the hyphenated wording looked odd, though I understand why
you used it. We don't use it elsewhere though (just `currently
prepared` san hyphen) so re-worded to match the other wording.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
;This means that any changes within subtransactions of the named
savepoint will be subcommitted and those subtransactions will be
destroyed."
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
don't necessarily object to rewriting these sentences more broadly,
> > but I don't think "have issued" is the correct phrasing.
> >
> > Possibly "The user issued ..." would work.
> >
Is there a reason that the first case says "just" issued vs the other
two cases? It seems to me that it should be removed.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 10:32 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 4 Aug 2022, at 00:44, Junwang Zhao wrote:
>
> > Attachment is a patch with the "just" removed.
>
> I think this is a change for better, so I've pushed it. Thanks for the
> contribution!
>
>
Thanks!
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
er reading this again, it isn't clear to me that this advice would
be more appropriately placed into Section 5.11, aka
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/ddl-partitioning.html, but in
lieu of a specific suggestion for where to place it there (I haven't
settled on one yet), IMHO, I think the first sentence of the suggested
change should be rewritten as:
Note that creating a partition using PARTITION OF
requires taking an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock on the parent table.
It may be preferable to first CREATE a separate table...
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
On Mon, Sep 5, 2022 at 2:04 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 01:45:49AM -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
> > After reading this again, it isn't clear to me that this advice would
> > be more appropriately placed into Section 5.11, aka
> > https://www.postgre
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 4:13 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 10:48 AM Robert Treat wrote:
> > > @Robert: I wonder why shouldn't CREATE..PARTITION OF *also* be patched
> > > to first create a table, and then attach the partition, transparently
> > >
> I think the mention of multixacts should link to
> . Again, I would not
> specifically mention the directory, since it is already described in
> "storage.sgml", but I have no strong optinion there.
>
> > +
> > +
> > + Subtransactions
>
> > +The word subtransaction is often abbreviated as
> > +subxact.
>
> I'd use , not .
>
> > +If a subtransaction is assigned a non-virtual transaction ID,
> > +its transaction ID is referred to as a subxid.
>
> Again, I would use , since we don't "subxid"
> elsewhere.
>
> + Up to
> +64 open subxids are cached in shared memory for each backend; after
> +that point, the overhead increases significantly since we must look
> +up subxid entries in pg_subtrans.
>
> Comma before "since". Perhaps you should mention that this means disk I/O.
>
ISTR that you only use a comma before since in cases where the
preceding thought contains a negative.
In any case, are you thinking something like this:
" 64 open subxids are cached in shared memory for each backend; after
that point the overhead increases significantly due to additional disk I/O
from looking up subxid entries in pg_subtrans."
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
ons for details."
Use of 'for' twice is grammatically incorrect; I am partial to "please
see the release notes from earlier versions for details." but could
also see "please see the release notes for earlier versions to get
details."
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
gh, just a matter of figuring out where/how to host it
(but I think infra can chime in on that if that's what get's decided).
The other likely option would be to seek out cloud credits from one of
the big three (or others); Amazon has continually said they would be
happy to donate more credits to us if we had a use, and I think some
of the other hosting providers have said similarly at times; so we'd
need to ask and hope it's not too bureaucratic.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
n in my mind was if we should add a
similar note to the original patch to max_prepared_xacts as well; do
you intend to do that?
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 4:05 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 4:00 PM Robert Treat wrote:
> > I think the only unresolved question in my mind was if we should add a
> > similar note to the original patch to max_prepared_xacts as well; do
> > you intend
pot to add in your additional info, but
maybe you can find a spot that fits? Or maybe a well written
walk-through of this would make for a good wiki page in case people
really want to dig in.
In any case, I think Roberto's original language is an improvement
over what we have now, so I'd probably recommend just going with that,
along with a similar note to max_prepared_xacts, and optionally a
pointer to the shared mem section of the docs.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
rs, it is hard to imagine we'd always have access to
the log files to figure this out on any actively running systems.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 7:23 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > On 14 Mar 2024, at 14:21, Robert Treat wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 8:21 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> >> - canceling connection in psql wouldn't
> >> cancel
>
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 12:15 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 10:49 PM Robert Treat wrote:
>>
>> This patch adds a link to the "attach partition" command section
>> (similar to the detach partition link above it) as
ng (like
5/6 might do)
Looking at it, you could make the argument that #4 is actually the
best of the solutions proposed, except it has the one drawback that it
requires folks to double down on the fiction that we think extensions
are a good way to build solutions when really everyone just wants to
have everything in core.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 8:21 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > On 14 Mar 2024, at 02:47, Robert Treat wrote:
>
> > I was taking a look at the login event triggers work (nice work btw)
>
> Thanks for reviewing committed code, that's something which doesn't happen
&g
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 3:08 AM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 10:52 PM Robert Treat wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 12:15 PM Ashutosh Bapat
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Robert,
>> &
postgresql.conf and silently remove vast
>> quantities of data without knowing that they're doing anything. We
>> don't even question that stuff ... although we probably should be
>
>
> I like how you got this far and didn't even mention fsync=off :)
>
And yet somehow query hints are more scary than ALL of these things. Go figure!
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
here's also a couple of wordsmiths in nearby areas to improve
readability.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
improve-partition-links.patch
Description: Binary data
I was taking a look at the login event triggers work (nice work btw)
and saw a couple of minor items that I thought would be worth cleaning
up. This is mostly just clarifying the exiting docs and code comments.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
login_event_trigger_small_cleanups.patch
Description
chlevel 2).
BTW, as a reminder, we do have this statement, in bold, in the
"upgrading" section of the versioning page:
"We always recommend that all users run the latest available minor
release for whatever major version is in use." There is actually
several other ph
On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 7:27 AM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 5:22 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 6:38 PM Robert Treat wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I've put it in the next commitfest with target version of 1
interested in moving this
> forward?
>
> Thanks!
>
Hey Andrey,
I spoke with Karl briefly on this and he is working on getting an
updated patch together. The work now involves incorporating feedback
and some rebasing, but hopefully we will see something in the next few
days.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 6:43 AM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 10:58 PM Robert Treat wrote:
>> v5 patch attached which I think further improves clarity/brevity of
>> this section. I've left the patch name the same for simplicity, but
>> I'd agree that
> not have a separate paragraph in the source code too. Thanks for fixing it. I
> think the intention of the current code as well as the patch is to have a
> single paragraph in HTML output, same as "no-extra-para" output.
>
It does seem like the source and the html output ought to match, so +1 from me.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
that it's not completely
avoidable...
That said, are you suggesting that the feature freeze deadline be
random, and also held in secret by the RMT, only to be announced after
the freeze time has passed? This feels weird, but might apply enough
deadline related pressure while avoiding last minute shenanigans.
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
53 matches
Mail list logo
