The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:tested, passed
I ran make installcheck-world and all tests passed except one
(Duplicated to make sure it's in the commitfest Thread, didn't seem to get in
there when I replied to the email)
Oops! I made a mistake, which clearly showed up in my last email: I forgot to
psql back in as "tester".
Now I get the right behavior:
$ psql postgres tester
postgres=>
Oops! I made a mistake, which clearly showed up in my last email: I forgot
to psql back in as "tester".
Now I get the right behavior:
$ psql postgres tester
psql (9.4.5, server 11devel)
Type "help" for help.
postgres=> select pg_read_file('/Users/postgres/temp');
ERROR: absolute path not
Hi Stephen,
I have another question then based on what you said earlier today, and some
testing I did using your patch.
TLDR: I created a role "tester" and was (as expected) not able to perform
pg_read_file() on files outside the data directory.
But then I granted EXECUTE on that function for
Tatsuo Ishii writes:
>> The documentation of PL/pgSQL provides sample codes of Oracle-compatible
>> instr functions. However, the behaviour is a little differet.
>> Oracle's instr raises an error when the forth argument value is less than
>> zero, but the sample code returns
Chapman Flack writes:
> I'm not sure what the usual shape of 'consensus' or 'resolution' is in these
> things,
> but it seems to me that the branch of this email thread that leads here
> (through the
> message from Robert that I'm replying to) is the one that felt like it
Hi Stephen,
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Perhaps it should really be in Needs review state then..?
Probably.
As I pointed out already some time ago, this RecentGlobalXmin
interlock stuff is our particular implementation of what Lanin &
Shasha call
I'm not sure what the usual shape of 'consensus' or 'resolution' is in these
things,
but it seems to me that the branch of this email thread that leads here
(through the
message from Robert that I'm replying to) is the one that felt like it was
converging.
I thought it was converging on the
Stephen Frost writes:
> Thinking through it, for my own 2c on this, I tend to agree with Tom
> that, really, we should be using strcmp() for anything coming out of the
> parser and that the backward-compatibility break from that is
> acceptable. I also understand Robert's
Greetings Michael, Daniel, all,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 4:14 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I think the changes in DefineView and ATExecSetRelOptions is wrong,
> > because transformRelOptions() is still using pg_strcasecmp.
According to buildfarm member silverfish,
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=silverfish=2018-01-06%2008%3A53%3A38
it's possible to sometimes get this failure in the regression tests:
***
Greetings Peter,
* Peter Geoghegan (p...@bowt.ie) wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> > IIRC the patches that makes the cleanup scan skip has a problem
> >> > pointed by Peter[1], that is that we stash an XID when a btree page is
> >> > deleted,
Greetings Pavel,
* Pavel Stehule (pavel.steh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> 2017-11-30 3:44 GMT+01:00 Michael Paquier :
> > At least documentation needs patching, or this is going to generate
> > warnings on HEAD at compilation. I am moving this to next CF for lack
> > of
Sophie Herold writes:
> the following patch allows to retrieve the typemod. Without this patch,
> it does not seem to be possible to generate the first column.
I thought about this a bit, and I now follow the problem you want to
solve, and agree that format_type() is going in
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> > IIRC the patches that makes the cleanup scan skip has a problem
>> > pointed by Peter[1], that is that we stash an XID when a btree page is
>> > deleted, which is used to determine when it's finally safe to recycle
>> >
Greetings,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> > Looking at order_qual_clauses(), we can say that a set of quals q1
> > qn are ordered the same irrespective of the set of clauses
Greetings,
* Konstantin Knizhnik (k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru) wrote:
> On 04.12.2017 19:44, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> >>
> >>On 30.11.2017 05:16, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 10:13 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik
> >>> wrote:
>
Greetings,
* Konstantin Knizhnik (k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru) wrote:
> On 15.12.2017 01:21, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 6:15 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> >wrote:
> >>Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> >>>If you still thing that additional 16 bytes per relation in
On 07.01.2018 00:11, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2018-01-06 22:02 GMT+01:00 Oleg Bartunov >:
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 8:22 AM, Pavel Stehule
> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am checking the
Greetings,
* Konstantin Knizhnik (k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru) wrote:
> On 30.11.2017 04:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik
> > wrote:
> >>One more patch passing all regression tests with autoprepare_threshold=1.
> >>I still
Greetings Claudio,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Jing Wang wrote:
> > A few general comments.
> >
> > + FreeSpaceMapVacuum(onerel, 64);
> >
> > Just want to know why '64' is used here? It's better to give a
Greetings,
(pruned the CC list)
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:06 AM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> Unless there is disagreement on the
Greetings Ildar,
* Fabien COELHO (coe...@cri.ensmp.fr) wrote:
> >>I noticed from the source of all human knowledege (aka Wikipedia:-)
> >>that there seems to be a murmur3 successor. Have you considered it?
> >>One good reason to skip it would be that the implementation is long
> >>and complex.
Doug,
* Rady, Doug (radyd...@amazon.com) wrote:
> This patch enables building pgbench to use ppoll() instead of select()
> to allow for more than (FD_SETSIZE - 10) connections. As implemented,
> when using ppoll(), the only connection limitation is system resources.
Looks like this patch had
I wrote:
> I still think that we ought to change the Asserts on cv_sleep_target in
> ConditionVariablePrepareToSleep and ConditionVariableSleep to be full
> test-and-elog tests. Those are checking a global correctness property
> ("global" meaning "interactions between completely unrelated modules
On 07.01.2018 00:33, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2018-01-06 22:23 GMT+01:00 Nikita Glukhov >:
On 07.01.2018 00:22, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hi
I try jsonpath on json
{
"book":
[
{
2018-01-06 22:23 GMT+01:00 Nikita Glukhov :
> On 07.01.2018 00:22, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I try jsonpath on json
>
> {
> "book":
> [
> {
> "title": "Beginning JSON",
> "author": "Ben Smith",
> "price": 49.99
>
On 07.01.2018 00:22, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hi
I try jsonpath on json
{
"book":
[
{
"title": "Beginning JSON",
"author": "Ben Smith",
"price": 49.99
},
{
"title": "JSON at Work",
"author": "Tom Marrs",
Hi
I try jsonpath on json
{
"book":
[
{
"title": "Beginning JSON",
"author": "Ben Smith",
"price": 49.99
},
{
"title": "JSON at Work",
"author": "Tom Marrs",
"price": 29.99
},
2018-01-06 22:02 GMT+01:00 Oleg Bartunov :
> On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 8:22 AM, Pavel Stehule
> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I am checking the JSONPath related code
> >
> > Questions, notes:
> >
> > 1. jsonpath operators are not consistent with any other ..
Ryan Murphy writes:
> Alexander, what is the process you're using to create the patch? I've heard
> someone (maybe Tom Lane?) say that he sometimes uses "patch" directly instead
> of "git" to create the patch, with better results. I forget the exact
> command.
Nah,
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 8:22 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am checking the JSONPath related code
>
> Questions, notes:
>
> 1. jsonpath operators are not consistent with any other .. json, xml .. I am
> missing ?, @> operátors
I have slides about jsonpath
I wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> No opinion without seeing what you propose to change.
> OK, will put out a proposal.
I began with the intention of making no non-cosmetic changes, but then
I started to wonder why ConditionVariablePrepareToSleep bothers with a
Greetings Ryan!
* Ryan Murphy (ryanfmur...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Stephen, so far I've read thru your patch and familiarized myself with some
> of the auth functionality in pg_authid.h and src/backend/utils/adt/acl.c
>
> The only question I have so far about your patch is the last several hunks of
On 30 November 2017 at 17:26, Robert Haas wrote:
> I wonder if we could instead think about R NORMALIZE S ON R.x = S.y
> WITH (R.time, S.time) as an ordinary join on R.x = S.y with some extra
> processing afterwards.
That would work nicely, kindof like a Projection, but
Stephen, so far I've read thru your patch and familiarized myself with some of
the auth functionality in pg_authid.h and src/backend/utils/adt/acl.c
The only question I have so far about your patch is the last several hunks of
the diff, which remove superuser checks without adding anything
Attached here there is the complete list of patches required to pass all
the tests. The 0001 patch is discussed in a separate thread, but I've
posted it also here to ease the review of the 0002.
Regards,
Marco
--
Marco Nenciarini - 2ndQuadrant Italy
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Thanks for this contribution!
I think it's a hard but important problem to upgrade these xids.
Unfortunately, I've confirmed that this patch 0001-64bit-guc-relopt-3.patch
doesn't apply correctly on my computer.
Here's what I did:
I did a "git pull" to the current HEAD, which is
Since the Patch Tester (http://commitfest.cputube.org/) says this Patch will
not apply correctly, I am tempted to change the status to Waiting on Author.
However, I'm new to the CommitFest process, so I'm leaving the status as-is for
now and asking Stephen Frost whether he agrees.
I haven't
On 01/03/2018 02:21 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 01/03/2018 01:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan writes:
>>> This small and simple standalone patch extracted from the SQL/JSON work
>>> would allow the user to supply a string with a time zone specified
Patch rebased on the current master.
Regards,
Marco
--
Marco Nenciarini - 2ndQuadrant Italy
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
marco.nenciar...@2ndquadrant.it | www.2ndQuadrant.it
diff --git a/contrib/test_decoding/expected/ddl.out
b/contrib/test_decoding/expected/ddl.out
index
On 29 December 2017 at 23:06, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> This is the patch series for UNIQUE / PRIMARY KEY indexes on partitioned
> tables. This is on top of the patch in
> https://postgr.es/m/20171229175930.3aew7lzwd5w6m2x6@alvherre.pgsql
> but I included it here as 0001
On 3 January 2018 at 03:12, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 12/29/17 17:53, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> This patch enables FOR EACH ROW triggers on partitioned tables.
>>
>> As presented, this patch is sufficient to discuss the semantics that we
>> want for triggers on
Hi Jeff,
Thanks for looking at the patch.
On 6 January 2018 at 10:34, Jeff Janes wrote:
> Couldn't the Unique node be removed entirely? If k is a primary key, you
> can't have duplicates in need of removal.
It probably could be, if there were no joins, but any join could
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 11:27 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I'm not.
>
> If we want to do this why not only do it in the modes that have meaning?
> i.e. put an if() test in for archive_mode == always.
OK, I can see value in your point as well. The check is a bit more
complicated
45 matches
Mail list logo