ened there.)
The following commit sounds like it might be related?
commit 06a7c3154f5bfad65549810cc84f0e3a77b408bf
Author: Tom Lane
Date: Fri Sep 18 16:46:26 2020 -0400
Allow most keywords to be used as column labels without requiring AS.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 4:38 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-11-21 12:52:35 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > version gram.o text bytes %change gram.c bytes %change
> >
> > 9.6 534010 -2108984 -
> > 10 582554
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 3:09 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> The last line in the chart I sent in the last email now look like this:
>
> 17-sqljson 670262 2.57 2640912 1.34
>
> meaning the gram.o text size changes by 2.57% as opposed to 2.97%
> before your fixes.
On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 6:40 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2023-Nov-17, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 4:27 PM jian he wrote:
>
> > > some enum declaration, ending element need an extra comma?
> >
> > Didn't know about the conventi
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 4:37 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-11-22 15:09:36 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > OK, I will keep polishing 0001-0003 with the intent to push it next
> > week barring objections / damning findings.
>
> I don't think the patchset is quite there
On Nov 16, 2023, at 17:48, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 2:11 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2023-11-15 22:00:41 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>>>> This causes a nontrivial increase in the size of the parser (~5% in an
>>>> optimized build he
the RETURNING
> + * type. Also see the description of possible step addresses this
> + * could be set to in the definition of JsonExprState.ZZ
> + */
>
> "ZZ", typo?
Indeed.
Will include the fixes in the next version.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 2:11 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-11-15 22:00:41 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > > This causes a nontrivial increase in the size of the parser (~5% in an
> > > optimized build here), I wonder if we can do better.
> >
> > Hmm, sorry if
Hi Erik,
On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 13:52 Erik Rijkers wrote:
> Op 11/15/23 om 14:00 schreef Amit Langote:
> > Hi,
>
> [..]
>
> > Attached updated patch. The version of 0001 that I posted on Oct 11
> > to add the error-safe version of CoerceViaIO contained many
>
Hi Erik,
On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 11:52 Erik Rijkers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At the moment, what is the patchset to be tested? The latest SQL/JSON
> server I have is from September, and it's become unclear to me what
> belongs to the SQL/JSON patchset. It seems to me cfbot erroneously
> shows green
as error-safe
input handling, possibly as a separate patch. IOW, the SQL/JSON patch
shouldn't really make a list of types to report as unsupported.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
at do you think of these options?
Yes maybe, though I'd first like to have a good answer to why is that
logic necessary at all. Maybe you think it's better to emit an error
in the SQL/JSON layer of code than in the type input function if it's
unsafe?
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 9:51 Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-10-18 at 22:34 +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> > It would be good to learn how many of the committers out of the ones
> > you listed that --enable-indent-checks would have saved from breaking
> > koel.
>
> I'd find that a useful option.
g_proc
(prosafe) or pg_type (typinsafe), but apparently there isn't.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Hi Anton,
On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 4:11 PM Anton A. Melnikov
wrote:
> On 17.10.2023 07:02, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > One thing jian he missed during the debugging is that
> > ExecEvalJsonExprCoersion() receives the EMPTY ARRAY value via
> > *op->resvalue/resnull, set
at
ExecEvalJsonExprCoersion() receives the EMPTY ARRAY value via
*op->resvalue/resnull, set by ExecEvalJsonExprBehavior(), because
that's the ON EMPTY behavior specified in the constraint. The bug was
that the code in ExecEvalJsonExprCoercion() failed to set val_string
to that value ("[]") before passing to InputFunctionCallSafe(), so the
latter would assume the input is NULL.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> Time: 6.858 ms
> @!>
>
> We're currently looking into this case.
Thanks for the report. I think I've figured out the problem --
ExecEvalJsonExprCoercion() mishandles the EMPTY ARRAY ON EMPTY case.
I'm reading the other 2 patches...
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 2:08 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 7, 2023 at 6:49 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2023-09-29 13:57:46 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > > Thanks. I will push the attached 0001 shortly.
> >
> > Sorry for not looking at this earl
Hi Andres,
On Sat, Oct 7, 2023 at 6:49 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2023-09-29 13:57:46 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > Thanks. I will push the attached 0001 shortly.
>
> Sorry for not looking at this earlier.
Thanks for the review. Replying here only to your comm
On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 19:01 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2023-Oct-06, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > 2. Assignment of op->d.iocoerce.escontext needed to be changed like this:
> >
> > v_params[4] =
> l_ptr_const(op->d.iocoerce.escontext,
>
On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 10:26 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 10:11 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 2:26 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 1:24 PM Amit Langote
> > > wrote:
> > > > Pushed this 30 min ag
On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 10:11 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 2:26 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 1:24 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > > Pushed this 30 min ago (no email on -committers yet!) and am looking
> > > at the following llvm
On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 2:26 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 1:24 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > Pushed this 30 min ago (no email on -committers yet!) and am looking
> > at the following llvm crash reported by buildfarm animal pogona [1]:
> >
>
On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 1:24 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> Pushed this 30 min ago (no email on -committers yet!) and am looking
> at the following llvm crash reported by buildfarm animal pogona [1]:
>
> #4 0x7f5bceb673d5 in __assert_fail_base (fmt=0x7f5bcecdbdc8
> "%s%s%s:%
On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 1:57 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 8:04 PM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > On 2023-Sep-27, Amit Langote wrote:
> > > Maybe the following is better:
> > >
> > > + /*
> > > +* For expression nodes that su
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 8:07 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 2:30 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > + /*
> > +* But the list of operator OIDs and the list of expressions may be
> > +* referenced somewhere else. Do not free those.
> >
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 8:07 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 2:30 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > Just out of curiosity, is their not being present in join_info_list
> > problematic in some manner, such as missed optimization opportunities
> > for ch
Hi Ashutosh,
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 1:20 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 6:37 AM Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 10:24 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 5:24 PM Amit Langote
> > > wrote:
On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 11:20 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 5:12 AM Amit Langote wrote:
> > Attached updated patches. Thanks for the review.
>
> I think 0001 looks ready to commit. I'm not sure that the commit
> message needs to mention future patches her
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 10:24 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 5:24 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > Just one comment on 0003:
> >
> > + /*
> > +* Dummy SpecialJoinInfos do not have any translated fields and hence
> >
is instead be Assert(child_sjinfo->jointype != JOIN_INNER)?
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 9:00 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:37 PM jian he wrote:
> > ---
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/extend-type-system.html#EXTEND-TYPES-POLYMORPHIC
> > >> When the return value of a function is dec
NULL. Maybe we can validate it in
> transformJsonFuncExpr?
> ---
I'm not sure whether we should make the parser complain about the
weird types being specified in RETURNING. The NULL you get in the
above example is because of the following error:
select json_qu
Hi Erik,
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 19:09 Erik Rijkers wrote:
> Op 9/18/23 om 05:15 schreef Amit Langote:
> > On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 3:34 PM Erik Rijkers wrote:
> >> Op 9/14/23 om 10:14 schreef Amit Langote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hi
> > Anyone remember why this is here? Should we remove it?
> >
> >
> > +1 for removing, on the basis that it is not suprising, and would
> > pollute logs for most configurations.
>
> done
+1 and thanks. May have been there as a debugging aid if anything.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
t; line should be ON EMPTY ?
Correct too.
> Other than that, the doc looks good.
Thanks for the review.
I will post a new version after finishing working on a few other
improvements I am working on.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 14:31 Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:05 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 10:32 AM Amit Langote
> wrote:
> > > But should ExecInitNode() subroutines return the partially initialized
> > > PlanState node or
On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 9:48 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 6:22 AM Amit Langote wrote:
> > > > I'm assuming it's not
> > > > too ugly if ExecInitAppend() uses IsParallelWorker() to decide whether
> > > > it should be writing to EStat
On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 11:16 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 2:58 AM Amit Langote wrote:
> > Or we could consider something like the patch I mentioned in my 1st
> > email. The idea there was to pass the pruning result via a separate
> > channel, not
On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 12:36 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 4:37 AM Amit Langote wrote:
> > Here's a patch set where the refactoring to move the ExecutorStart()
> > calls to be closer to GetCachedPlan() (for the call sites that use a
> > CachedPlan) is extr
On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 12:53 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 10:25 AM Amit Langote wrote:
> > Note we’re talking here about “initial” pruning that occurs during
> > ExecInitNode(). Workers are only launched during ExecGather[Merge]() which
> > there
during
ExecInitNode(). Workers are only launched during ExecGather[Merge]() which
thereafter do ExecInitNode() on their copy of the the plan tree. So if we
are to pass the pruning results for cross-checking, it will have to be from
the leader to workers.
> --
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 19:01 Erik Rijkers wrote:
> Op 7/21/23 om 12:33 schreef Amit Langote:
> >
> > Thanks for taking a look.
> >
>
> Hi Amit,
>
> Is there any chance to rebase the outstanding SQL/JSON patches, (esp.
> json_query)?
Yes, wor
time do not have tuples in the
> pg_proc catalog. Is it unnecessary?
Yes. These are not functions that get pg_proc entries, but SQL
constructs that *look like* functions, similar to XMLEXISTS(), etc.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
estate(pstate);
>
> return resultRelInfo;
> }
>
> In this case, how can we get the relinfo->ri_RootResultRelInfo to store the
> appropriate data?
Your function doesn't seem to have access to the ModifyTableState
node, so setting ri_RootResultRelInfo to the correct ResultRelInfo
node does not seem doable.
As I suggested in my previous reply, please check if passing 0 (not
list_length(estate->es_range_table)) for the 3rd argument
InitResultRelInfo() fixes the problem and gives the correct result.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 7:33 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 1:02 AM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > On 2023-Jul-21, Amit Langote wrote:
> >
> > > I’m thinking of pushing 0001 and 0002 tomorrow barring objections.
> >
> > 0001 looks reaso
ate->opts.force_quote_all)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < num_phys_attrs; i++)
cstate->opts.force_quote_flags[i] = true;
}
Perhaps we could fix the inconsistency by changing the force_quote_all
code to use MemSet() too. I'll defer whether to do that to Andrew's
judgement.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 17:19 Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 5:17 PM Amit Langote
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 12:53 AM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > > On 2023-Jul-18, Amit Langote wrote:
> > >
> > > > Attached upd
Hello,
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 10:35 AM jian he wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 5:11 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > > Op 7/17/23 om 07:00 schreef jian he:
> > > > hi.
> > > > seems there is no explanation about, json_api_common_syntax in
> > > &g
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 5:17 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 12:53 AM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > On 2023-Jul-18, Amit Langote wrote:
> > > b6e1157e7d Don't include CaseTestExpr in JsonValueExpr.formatted_expr
> >
> > I feel a bit uneasy ab
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 12:53 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2023-Jul-18, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > Attached updated patches. In 0002, I removed the mention of the
> > RETURNING clause in the JSON(), JSON_SCALAR() documentation, which I
> > had forgotten to do in the la
ResultRelInfo pointing at the wrong RTE via its ri_RangeTableIndex.
That code should perhaps set the ri_RangeTableIndex to 0 if it doesn't
know the actual existing RTE corresponding to that result relation.
If you set it to some non-0 value, the RTE that it points to should
satisfy invariants such as having the corresponding RTEPermissionInfo
present in the rteperminfos list if necessary.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
() most likely via
markRTEForSelectPriv()) is not expecting to be called with? I would
be helpful to see a backtrace when the error occurs to be sure.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 5:27 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 21 Mar 2023, at 06:03, Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 3:54 AM Gregory Stark (as CFM)
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 at 14:59, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> >>> But I t
On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 8:31 PM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 21.06.23 10:25, Amit Langote wrote:
> > I realized that the patch for the "other sql/json functions" part is
> > relatively straightforward and has no dependence on the "sql/json
> > query function
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 4:30 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 4:12 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:40 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > > > On 2023-Feb-20, Amit Langote wrote:
> >
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 4:12 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:40 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > > On 2023-Feb-20, Amit Langote wrote:
> > >> One more thing we could try is come up with a postgres_fdw tes
ssible, match_clause_to_partition_key() may pick one as a
comparison function for pruning, because it doesn't actually check the
procedure's provolatile before doing so. I'd hope not, though would
like to be sure to support what I wrote above.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
[1]
ommitfest.postgresql.org/43/4377/
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 10:25 AM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 5:07 PM Sho Kato (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> > I've attached the patch for the following rewriteTargetView comments.
> >
> > s/rewriteQuery/RewriteQuery
>
> Good catch and thanks for the pa
recurse through rewriteQuery, which will invoke
> * rewriteTargetListIU again on the updated targetlist.
> */
> if (parsetree->commandType != CMD_DELETE)
> {
> foreach(lc, parsetree->targetList)
>
> s/rewriteQuery/RewriteQuery
Good catch and thanks for the patch. Will push shortly.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 10:48 PM Tristan Partin wrote:
> Nice catch. Looks good.
Thanks for checking. As just mentioned, I've pushed this moments ago.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 6:54 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> I noticed that 2f2b18bd3f55 forgot to remove the mention of
> parse_jsontable.c in src/backend/parser/README.
>
> Attached a patch to fix that. Will push that shortly to HEAD and v15.
Pushed to HEAD only. 9853bf6ab0
Hi,
I noticed that 2f2b18bd3f55 forgot to remove the mention of
parse_jsontable.c in src/backend/parser/README.
Attached a patch to fix that. Will push that shortly to HEAD and v15.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
v1-0001-Remove-outdated-reference-to-a-removed
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 15:49 Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 15:44 Michael Paquier wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 02:34:56PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>> > This being my first commit, I intently looked to check if everything’s
>> set
>>
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 15:44 Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 02:34:56PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > This being my first commit, I intently looked to check if everything’s
> set
> > up correctly. While it seemed to have hit gitweb and GitHub, it didn’t
&g
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 12:08 Amit Langote wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 9:40 PM David Steele wrote:
> > On 6/13/23 11:38, Amit Langote wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 6:33 PM Alvaro Herrera <
> alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
> > >> Note that y
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 9:40 PM David Steele wrote:
> On 6/13/23 11:38, Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 6:33 PM Alvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
> >> Note that you changed one comment from "permission checks" to
> >> "permission he
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 6:33 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Note that you changed one comment from "permission checks" to
> "permission hecks".
Oops, thanks for pointing that out.
Fixed in the attached.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 4:44 PM David Steele wrote:
> On 6/13/23 06:09, Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 10:27 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Julien Rouhaud writes:
> >>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 08:56:47AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>>> -
p; OidIsValid(rte->relid)"
condition, but that seemed like an overkill, so only added one in the
#ifdef USE_ASSERT_CHECKING block in ExecCheckPermissions() that
f75cec4fff877 added.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From f7390a898b7e156d75372d28ea5698d2ced9795b Mon Sep 17
t;
> > If you see "rte->rtekind == RTE_SUBQUERY && OidIsValid(rte->relid)",
> > it's dead certain that relid refers to a view, so you could just wire
> > in that knowledge.
>
> Yeah, that's a good trick. Even so, I wonder why relkind is not set when
> rel
bout views.
> --
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
the EPQ during LockRows?
> What I'm thinking about doing to back-patch this is to replace
> one of the pointer fields in EPQState with a pointer to a
> subsidiary palloc'd structure, where we can put the new fields
> along with the cannibalized old one. We've done something
> simila
it.
(Wouldn’t have been able to get to it till Monday myself.)
> --
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 17:52 Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 2:40 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > The Core Team would like to extend our congratulations to
> > Nathan Bossart, Amit Langote, and Masahiko Sawada, who have
> > accepted invitations to
On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 3:33 Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Langote writes:
> > While thinking about query view locking in context of [1], I realized
> > that we have missed also fixing AcquirePlannerLocks() /
> > ScanQueryForLocks() to consider that an RTE_SUBQUERY rte may belong
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 10:29 PM Amit Langote
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 6:41 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > A few concrete thoughts:
> >
> > * I understand that your plan now is to acquire locks on all the
> > originally-named tables, then do permissions checks (which
On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 10:06 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Langote writes:
> > On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 5:58 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Conceivably we could make it work by allowing RTE_SUBQUERY RTEs to
> >> carry a relation OID and associated RTEPermissionInfo, so that when
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 6:41 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Langote writes:
> > [ v38 patchset ]
>
> I spent a little bit of time looking through this, and concluded that
> it's not something I will be wanting to push into v16 at this stage.
> The patch doesn't seem very close
ed into one of the existing
> tables. I didn't actually review the docs.
I made the jsonfuncs.c changes to use soft error handling when needed,
so I took a stab at that; attached a delta patch, which also fixes the
problematic comments mentioned by Alexander in his comments 1 and 3.
I'll need to spend some time to address other points.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
v15-0002-delta.patch
Description: Binary data
ep ec386948948 that introduced the
notion of part_prune_index around if the project that needed it [1]
has moved on to an entirely different approach altogether, one that
doesn't require hacking up the pruning code.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
[1] https://commitfest.postgresql
d8);
jsonb_object_agg_unique_strict
{}
(1 row)
postgres=# SELECT jsonb_object_agg_unique_strict('1', null::xid8);
jsonb_object_agg_unique_strict
{}
(1 row)
SELECT jsonb_object_agg_unique_strict('1', '1'::xid8);
jsonb_obje
than in the next couple of weeks for this
release. My apologies that I didn't withdraw the patch sooner.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
respondingly, as in the attached?
Agree it looks cleaner and self-explanatory that way. Thanks.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 7:31 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 23:38 Andres Freund wrote:
>> The tests seem to frequently hang on freebsd:
>> https://cirrus-ci.com/github/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/commitfest%2F42%2F3478
>
> Thanks for the heads up. I’ve
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 4:45 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:25 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Evaluating N expressions for a json table isn't a good approach, both memory
> > and CPU efficiency wise.
>
> Are you referring to JsonTableInitOpaque() initial
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:40 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > On 2023-Feb-20, Amit Langote wrote:
> >> One more thing we could try is come up with a postgres_fdw test case,
> >> because it uses the RelOptInfo.userid value for remote-costs-base
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:09 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 11:41 PM Erik Rijkers wrote:
> > Op 20-02-2023 om 08:35 schreef Amit Langote:
> > > Rebased again over queryjumble overhaul.
> > But the following statement is a problem. It does not crash b
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 9:02 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2022-Dec-11, Amit Langote wrote:
> > While staring at the build_simple_rel() bit mentioned above, I
> > realized that this code fails to set userid correctly in the
> > inheritance parent rels that are child relatio
On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 22:31 Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Langote writes:
> > On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 5:07 Justin Pryzby wrote:
> >> That seems to add various elog()s which are hit frequently by sqlsmith:
>
> > Thanks for the report. I’ll take a look once I’m back at a
On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 5:07 Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 10:37:56PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > 0002 contains changes that has to do with changing how we access
> > checkAsUser in some foreign table planning/execution code sites.
> > Thought it might
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 14:44 Sergey Shinderuk
wrote:
> On 08.02.2023 21:23, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2023-Feb-08, Amit Langote wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 16:19 Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> >
> >>> I think we should a
RTEs, for example. Also, it
doesn’t make much sense to reinstate the original loop over range table and
fetch the RTEPermissionInfo for the RTEs with non-0 perminfoindex, because
the main goal of the patch was to make ExecCheckPermissions() independent
of range table length.
> --
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 23:38 Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2023-02-03 22:01:09 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > I've added a test case under src/modules/delay_execution by adding a
> > new ExecutorStart_hook that works similarly as
> > delay_execution_planner().
On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 11:49 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 4:01 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > I didn't actually go with calling the plancache on every lock taken on
> > a relation, that is, in ExecGetRangeTableRelation(). One thing about
> > doing it that wa
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 4:01 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 12:52 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > Alright, I'll try to get something out early next week. Thanks for
> > all the pointers.
>
> Sorry for the delay. Attached is what I've come up with so far.
>
ller knows what those locks are, it can pass them as an array.
* That speeds up the call significantly, when a lot of locks are held
* (e.g pg_dump with a large schema). Otherwise, pass NULL for locallocks,
* and we'll traverse through our hash table to find them.
*/
--
Thanks, A
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 5:43 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> David Rowley writes:
> > On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 01:30, Amit Langote wrote:
> >> It seems that the planner currently elides an Append/MergeAppend that
> >> has run-time pruning info (part_prune_index) set, but
-time pruning doesn't
kick in to prune p1, even though PartitionPruneInfo to do so has been
generated.
Attached find a patch to fix that. There are some expected output
diffs in partition_prune suite, though they all look sane to me.
Thoughts?
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http
101 - 200 of 2322 matches
Mail list logo
