Re: Pg 16: will pg_dump & pg_restore be faster?

2023-06-04 Thread David Rowley
On Sat, 3 Jun 2023 at 00:14, Jonathan S. Katz  wrote:
> Typically once a release announcement is out, we'll only edit it if it's
> inaccurate. I don't think the statement in the release announcement is
> inaccurate, as it specifies that concurrent bulk loading is faster.

Understood.  I had thought that the policy might be that if there's
room for and reason enough to make improvements, then we probably
should.  We do aim to still make improvements to fix any problem with
the software that's the topic of the announcement, maybe it's strange
that we want to lock down what we write about that software just
before the beta1 release.

> I'm -0.5 for revising the announcement, but I also don't want people to
> miss out on testing this. I'd be OK with this:
>
> "PostgreSQL 16 can also improve the performance of bulk loading of data,
> with some tests showing using up to 300% improvement when concurrently
> executing `COPY` commands."

I might have just misunderstood the release notes based on my
misunderstanding of Andres's work that it only improved things when
multiple backends were extending the relation at the same time.  The
release announcement did seem to confirm that there had to be
concurrency, so it might be good to not lead anyone else down into
thinking that only concurrent cases are faster. I certainly understand
that's where the big wins are.

I'm fine with your proposed wording.

David




[Question]What will happen if the server active close the connection?

2023-06-04 Thread Wen Yi
Hi team,
when I study the tcp connection, I found that if the server active close the 
connection, the server will send a fin package to the client and the client 
will reply a ack package.
As this:


Server (FIN) Client
Server <(ACK) Client


My question is, in so many articles, the following step is, the client will 
write some data(send some data) to the server and then cause the signal 
SIGNALPIPE.
But what will happen if the client died?(Example: was killed by the user)


Can someone provide some advice?
Thanks in advance!


Yours,
Wen Yi

Re: "pgsql-zh-general" can't send chinese mail.

2023-06-04 Thread Wen Yi
Sorry, it's all my fault, I use error mail-box settings.


Yours,
Wen Yi











--Original--
From:   
 "postgresql439848" 
   
https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-zh-general/since/202306040910

 Can someone provide some solution?
 Thanks in advance!


 Yours,
 Wen Yi

Re: "pgsql-zh-general" can't send chinese mail.

2023-06-04 Thread postgresql439848

Hi,

Am 04.06.23 um 11:15 schrieb Wen Yi:

Hi team,
I want to use the list "pgsql-zh-general" to communicate with chinese user.
But it can't send chinese mail, because he recognizes all Chinese emails 
as spam.
before this message your mail was listed at 
https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-zh-general/since/202306040910



Can someone provide some solution?
Thanks in advance!


Yours,
Wen Yi






"pgsql-zh-general" can't send chinese mail.

2023-06-04 Thread Wen Yi
Hi team,
I want to use the list "pgsql-zh-general" to communicate with chinese user.
But it can't send chinese mail, because he recognizes all Chinese emails 
as spam.




Can someone provide some solution?
Thanks in advance!


Yours,
Wen Yi

Re: Connection error to new pg15 instance

2023-06-04 Thread Steve Baldwin
It turns out RDS by default forces ssl connections for pg15 instances. I
have turned this off for now while I work out how that impacts my code and
I can now connect to the pg15 instance.

Thanks,

Steve

On Sun, Jun 4, 2023 at 3:10 PM Steve Baldwin 
wrote:

> I suspect it may have something to do with ssl. The FATAL error in the log
> said "no encryption". I'm not sure what that means. When I look at a
> connection to one of our pg14 instances from the same API server, I see
> this in the logs:
>
> 2023-06-04 00:03:06.210 UTC,"b2bc_api","b2bcreditonline",16024,"
> 10.120.141.112:49228",647bd4ba.3e98,2,"authentication",2023-06-04
> 00:03:06 UTC,25/2682741,0,LOG,0,"connection authenticated:
> identity=""b2bc_api"" method=md5
> (/rdsdbdata/config/pg_hba.conf:13)","","client backend",,0
>
> Here are the hba rules for that instance:
>
> b2bcreditonline=> select * from pg_hba_file_rules;
>  line_number | type  | database  | user_name  | address  | netmask
> |  auth_method  | options | error
>
> -+---+---++--+-+---+-+---
>4 | local | {all} | {all}  |  |
> | scram-sha-256 | |
>   10 | host  | {all} | {rdsadmin} | samehost |
> | scram-sha-256 | |
>   11 | host  | {all} | {rdsadmin} | all  |
> | reject| |
>   12 | host  | {rdsadmin}| {all}  | all  |
> | reject| |
>   13 | host  | {all} | {all}  | all  |
> | md5   | |
>   14 | host  | {replication} | {all}  | samehost |
> | scram-sha-256 | |
>   17 | host  | {rds_replication} | {all}  | all  |
> | md5   | |
> (7 rows)
>
> So line 13 is type 'host'.
>
> When I look at the hba rules for the pg15 instance, there is no
> corresponding entry:
>
> b2bcreditonline=> select * from pg_hba_file_rules;
>  line_number |  type   | database  | user_name  | address  |
> netmask |  auth_method  |  options  | error
>
> -+-+---++--+-+---+---+---
>2 | local   | {all} | {rdsadmin} |  |
>   | peer  | {map=rds} |
>6 | local   | {all} | {all}  |  |
>   | scram-sha-256 |   |
>   12 | host| {all} | {rdsadmin} | samehost |
>   | scram-sha-256 |   |
>   13 | host| {all} | {rdsadmin} | all  |
>   | reject|   |
>   14 | host| {rdsadmin}| {all}  | all  |
>   | reject|   |
>   15 | hostssl | {all} | {all}  | all  |
>   | md5   |   |
>   16 | host| {replication} | {all}  | samehost |
>   | scram-sha-256 |   |
>   21 | hostssl | {rds_replication} | {all}  | all  |
>   | md5   |   |
> (8 rows)
>
> The entry that was used when I made a psql connection was line 15 which
> has a type of 'hostssl'.
>
> I'm not sure what this means in terms of what I need to change. Maybe I
> need to raise this with AWS support?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Steve
>
> On Sun, Jun 4, 2023 at 11:11 AM Steve Baldwin 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm in the process of migrating from an RDS pg14 instance to pg15.3. As
>> part of the migration process, the application code makes a test connection
>> to the new instance. This failed. I tried manually connecting to the kube
>> pod where the test query was submitted from, and from there was able to
>> manually connect to the new instance (using psql) just fine.
>>
>> Here are the (hopefully) relevant chunks from the database log:
>>
>> :
>> 2023-06-04 00:29:11.890 
>> UTC,,,2764,"10.120.80.80:46914",647bdad7.acc,1,"",2023-06-04
>> 00:29:11 UTC,,0,LOG,0,"connection received: host=10.120.80.80
>> port=46914","","not initialized",,0
>> 2023-06-04 00:29:11.891 UTC,"b2bc_owner","b2bcreditonline",2764,"
>> 10.120.80.80:46914",647bdad7.acc,2,"authentication",2023-06-04 00:29:11
>> UTC,7/1009,0,FATAL,28000,"no pg_hba.conf entry for host ""10.120.80.80"",
>> user ""b2bc_owner"", database ""b2bcreditonline"", no
>> encryption","","client backend",,0
>> :
>> 2023-06-04 00:43:56.114 
>> UTC,,,4046,"10.120.80.80:56356",647bde4c.fce,1,"",2023-06-04
>> 00:43:56 UTC,,0,LOG,0,"connection received: host=10.120.80.80
>> port=56356","","not initialized",,0
>> 2023-06-04 00:43:56.127 UTC,"b2bc_owner","b2bcreditonline",4046,"
>> 10.120.80.80:56356",647bde4c.fce,2,"authentication",2023-06-04 00:43:56
>> UTC,7/1626,0,LOG,0,"connection authenticated: identity=""b2bc_owner""
>> method=md5 (/rdsdbdata/config/pg_hba.conf:15)","","client
>> backend",,0
>> 2023-06-04 00:43:56.127 UTC,"b2bc_owner","b2bcreditonline",4046,"
>> 

Re: How to remove user specific grant and revoke

2023-06-04 Thread Andrus

Hi!



>From your first message I was under the impression that pgAdmin shows one
REVOKE ALL for every GRANT, i.e. all REVOKE commands at once.  If that is not
the case you may have found a bug in pgAdmin.  Please ask on the pgadmin-support
list or open a GitHub issue.

Speaking of which, I foundhttps://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/issues/5926
which looks like the behavior you're describing.  But this was already fixed in
7.2 and your original post says that you're using 7.2.  Please check if your
version is correct.


In pgAdmin 7.2  right clicking in table name and selecting Refresh does 
nothing.


Smells like a bug.

Right clicking in Tables and selecting Refresh  worked.

Andrus.