Here is a simple patch which adds a bunch of operators (bitwise: & | ^ ~,
comparisons: =/== <>/!= < <= > >=, logical: and/&& or/|| xor/^^ not/!) and
functions (exp ln if) to pgbench. I've tried to be pg's SQL compatible where
appropriate.
Also attached is a simple test script.
Here is a si
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:57 AM, Marco Nenciarini
> wrote:
>> After further analysis, the issue is that we retrieve the starttli from
>> the ControlFile structure, but it was using ThisTimeLineID when writing
>> the backup label.
>>
>> I'v
* Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote:
> This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send
> a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status
> update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/201
On 30 June 2016 at 03:49, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 3:44 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
>> On 06/24/2016 01:31 PM, David Rowley wrote:
>>> Seems there's a small error in the upgrade script for citext for 1.1
>>> to 1.2 which will cause min(citext) not to be parallel enabled.
>>>
>
On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 07:03:33PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 11:50:17AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > * Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> > > > Do this:
> > > >
> > > > CREATE DATABASE test1;
> >
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 03:38:26PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:57 AM, Marco Nenciarini
> wrote:
> > After further analysis, the issue is that we retrieve the starttli from
> > the ControlFile structure, but it was using ThisTimeLineID when writing
> > the backup label
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 4:02 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>
> 2016-07-08 20:39 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane :
>>
>> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>> > As a separate concern, IMO having the source code in a \df+ column is
>> > almost completely useless.
>>
>> Good point. It works okay for C/internal functions, but i
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> How do you feel about adding testing to tuplesort.c not limited to
>> hitting this bug (when Valgrind memcheck is used)?
>
> Sounds great, but again, not in the patch fixing this bug.
Attached patch adds a CLUSTER external sort test case to th
Please see comment at the bottom of this post.
On 08/07/16 10:48, Pete Stevenson wrote:
Good info, thanks for the note. Agreed that it is difficult to pull
things apart to isolate these features for offload — so actually
running experiments with offload is not possible, as you point out
(and f
Greg Stark writes:
> Fwiw here's the pmap info from burbot (Linux Sparc64):
> 136 48 48 rw---[ stack ]
> 136 48 48 rw---[ stack ]
> 136 48 48 rw---[ stack ]
> 136 48 48 rw---[ stack ]
> 136 56 56 rw---[ stack ]
> 136 80
Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Has anyone ever done any kind of write-up of the "TED" design that was
> discussed during FOSDEM (I hope I recall the name it was given
> correctly)? Apparently that's something that's been discussed a few
> times among senior community members, and I think it has promise.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hm, after reading the man page I don't quite see how that would help?
> You'd have to already know the mapped stack address range in order to
> call the function without getting ENOMEM.
I had assumed unmapped pages would just return a 0 in the bi
2016-07-08 20:39 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane :
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > As a separate concern, IMO having the source code in a \df+ column is
> > almost completely useless.
>
> Good point. It works okay for C/internal functions, but in those cases
> it's usually redundant with the proname. For PL fu
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Pete Stevenson
wrote:
> Hi postgresql hackers -
>
> I would like to find some analysis (published work, blog posts) on the
> overheads affiliated with the guarantees provided by MVCC isolation. More
> specifically, assuming the current workload is CPU bound (as o
On 2016-07-08 13:32:35 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2016-07-08 11:00:50 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >>
> >> > So I don't think that approach still allows old snapshot relate
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Sure, but we could *also* do it separately, splitting VACUUMs tasks of
>> tuple freezing, page compaction, and index entry removal each into
>> separate tasks.
>
> Uh ... wouldn't that tend to make things worse? The knocks on VACUUM are
> too mu
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Pete Stevenson
wrote:
> I would like to find some analysis (published work, blog posts)
> on the overheads affiliated with the guarantees provided by MVCC
> isolation.
There are three levels of isolation implemented[1]; the incremental
cost of SERIALIZABLE isolat
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> VACUUM in itself is an offloading optimization; the whole point of it
>> is to do maintenance in a background process not foreground queries.
> Well, if VACUUM worked so great, we wouldn't get so many trouble reports
> with it. There's substantial impr
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> At Fri, 10 Jun 2016 17:39:59 +0900, Michael Paquier
> wrote in
>
> > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> > wrote:
> > Indeed, and you could just do the following to reproduce the failure
> > with the recovery test suite, so I would suggest adding th
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> As a separate concern, IMO having the source code in a \df+ column is
> almost completely useless.
Good point. It works okay for C/internal functions, but in those cases
it's usually redundant with the proname. For PL functions it's a disaster
formatting-wise, because t
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > Pete Stevenson wrote:
> >> Maybe I could figure out the lines of code that add versions into a
> >> table and then those that collect old versions (they do get collected,
> >> right?). Anyway, thought being I could profile while running TPC-C or
> >> si
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2016-07-08 11:00:50 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>
>> > So I don't think that approach still allows old snapshot related
>> > cleanups for toast triggered vacuums? Is that an accep
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Pete Stevenson wrote:
>> Maybe I could figure out the lines of code that add versions into a
>> table and then those that collect old versions (they do get collected,
>> right?). Anyway, thought being I could profile while running TPC-C or
>> similar. I was hoping that som
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:29 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> When I tested some queries, I found strange plan
>> postgres=# explain analyze select s.nazev, o.nazev, o.pocet_obyvatel from
>> (select nazev, array(select id from obce_pocet_obyvatel where okresy.id =
>> okres_id orde
Hello,
Attached is a patch for xlogreader.c for a more informative error message
for allocate_recordbuf() failure.
The patch details are:
- Project name.: None
- Uniquely identifiable file name, so we can tell difference between
your v1 and v24.: src/backend/access/transam/xlogread
Hi,
I have a question about logical decoding of Postgres.
where are the entry points to logical decoding?
Specifically, we want to know whether logical decoding happens immediately
after commit, or whether there is a polling thread that scans the Write
Ahead Log and then dumps to the special t
On 2016-07-08 11:00:50 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > So I don't think that approach still allows old snapshot related
> > cleanups for toast triggered vacuums? Is that an acceptable
> > restriction?
>
> What I would rather see is that
Pete Stevenson wrote:
> Maybe I could figure out the lines of code that add versions into a
> table and then those that collect old versions (they do get collected,
> right?). Anyway, thought being I could profile while running TPC-C or
> similar. I was hoping that someone might be able to jump on
The very minor patch attached improves the PL/pgSQL documentation about
trigger functions. It moves the description common to both data change &
database event triggers out of the first section and into a common header.
It adds a link at the beginning of the sections to their corresponding
gener
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
> >> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
> >> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane alre
Fabien COELHO writes:
> The very minor patch attached improves the PL/pgSQL documentation about
> trigger functions. It moves the description common to both data change &
> database event triggers out of the first section and into a common header.
> It adds a link at the beginning of the sectio
Etsuro Fujita writes:
> I noticed that the return type of IsForeignScanParallelSafe described in
> fdwhandler.sgml isn't correct; that should be bool, not Size. Please
> find attached a small patch for that.
Pushed, thanks!
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hack
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> So I don't think that approach still allows old snapshot related
> cleanups for toast triggered vacuums? Is that an acceptable
> restriction?
What I would rather see is that if the heap is vacuumed (whether or
not by autovacuum) then the re
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Amit Kapila writes:
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Michael Paquier
> > wrote:
> >> Okay. Here we go. I named the column for the parallel information
> >> "Parallelism".
>
> > Another option could be to name it as Parallel Mode.
>
> I'd go with just
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
> >> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
> >> large, so I guess that any pe
Amit Kapila writes:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> Okay. Here we go. I named the column for the parallel information
>> "Parallelism".
> Another option could be to name it as Parallel Mode.
I'd go with just "Parallel", to keep it from being noticeably wider than
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
>> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
>> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with
>> the exp
Greg Stark writes:
> Searching for info on ia64 turned up this interesting thread:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/21563.1289064886%40sss.pgh.pa.us
Yeah, that's the same one I referenced upthread ;-)
> From that discussion it seems we should probably run these tests with
> -O0 because th
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 4:46 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Based on what I'm seeing so far, really 100K ought to be more than plenty
> of slop for most architectures, but I'm afraid to go there for IA64.
Searching for info on ia64 turned up this interesting thread:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Than you for reviewing!
>
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2016-07-05 23:37:59 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> diff --git a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c
>>> b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c
>>> index 57
Good info, thanks for the note. Agreed that it is difficult to pull things
apart to isolate these features for offload — so actually running experiments
with offload is not possible, as you point out (and for other reasons).
Maybe I could figure out the lines of code that add versions into a tab
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
>>> parallel status of a function. The
On 08/07/16 13:10, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Marco Nenciarini
> wrote:
>> The resulting backup is working perfectly, because Postgres has no use
>> for pg_stop_backup LSN, but this can confuse any tool that uses the stop
>> LSN to figure out which WAL files are neede
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>>> Regarding the first hunk, I don't like these INTERFACE sections too
>>> much; they get seriously outdated over the time and aren't all that
>>> helpful anyway.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
>> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
>> large, so I guess that any peo
On 08/07/16 12:47, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 8 July 2016 at 09:41, Robert Haas mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
If you want to add a column to a table, you
say ALTER TABLE .. ADD COLUMN. If you want to add a column to an
extension, you say ALTER EXTENSION .. ADD TABLE. If you wa
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Marco Nenciarini
wrote:
> The resulting backup is working perfectly, because Postgres has no use
> for pg_stop_backup LSN, but this can confuse any tool that uses the stop
> LSN to figure out which WAL files are needed by the backup (in this case
> the only file nee
On 8 July 2016 at 11:18, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Simon Riggs writes:
>
> > > pg_am has existed for decades without supporting DDL
> >
> > That argument has been obsoleted by events ;-) ... and in any case, the
> > reason we went without CREATE ACCESS METHOD for so long was no
On 8 July 2016 at 09:41, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> > Personally, I'm in the group of people that don't see the need for DDL.
> > There are already many successful features that don't utilize DDL, such
> as
> > backup, advisory locks and some features that use DDL that don't really
> need
> > to suc
Hi,
I noticed that the return type of IsForeignScanParallelSafe described in
fdwhandler.sgml isn't correct; that should be bool, not Size. Please
find attached a small patch for that.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml
index
On 8 July 2016 at 11:09, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>
> One interesting thing will be making sure we can replicate from physical
> standby in the future as you mentioned elsewhere in the thread but I think
> that should be possible as long as you define the catalogs on master (not
> really sure yet if t
On 08/07/16 10:59, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 8 July 2016 at 03:55, Tom Lane mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote:
> One of my examples was full text search and it does have
> DDL, but that was an anti-example; all the feedback I have is that it was
> much easier to use before it had DDL and
On 07/07/16 08:38, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:57 AM, Marco Nenciarini
> wrote:
>> After further analysis, the issue is that we retrieve the starttli from
>> the ControlFile structure, but it was using ThisTimeLineID when writing
>> the backup label.
>>
>> I've attached a ve
On 8 July 2016 at 03:55, Tom Lane wrote:
> > One of my examples was full text search and it does have
> > DDL, but that was an anti-example; all the feedback I have is that it was
> > much easier to use before it had DDL and that forcing it to use DDL
> pretty
> > much killed it for most users.
On 8 July 2016 at 03:50, Pete Stevenson wrote:
> Hi Simon -
>
> Thanks for the note. I think it's fair to say that I didn't provide enough
> context, so let me try and elaborate on my question.
>
Please reply in-line in posts to make it easier to follow conversations
with multiple people.
> It
2016-07-08 9:00 GMT+02:00 Michael Paquier :
> Hi all,
>
> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with
> the expanded display mode, and
On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with
> the expanded display mode
Hi all,
Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with
the expanded display mode, and it may not matter adding more
information.
Thoughts abo
58 matches
Mail list logo
