Congratulations Everyone :)
Thanks & Regards,
Rajkumar Raghuwanshi
QMG, EnterpriseDB Corporation
On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 10:55 PM, MauMau wrote:
> From: Tom Lane
> The core team is pleased to announce the appointment of seven
> new Postgres committers:
>
>
> Congratulations to 7 cool generals!
On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 2:00 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> In XL, GTM is a singe component managing transaction ids. That has a
> standby, so is not a SPOF.
>
> But that is not what I mean. I don't believe that a GTM-style
> component is necessary in a future in-core scalablility solution.
>
I
Find attached an update which also supports column completion using the legacy
non-parenthesized syntax.
diff --git a/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.c b/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.c
index 7bb47ea..699a102 100644
--- a/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.c
+++ b/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.c
@@ -705,6 +705,7 @@
Some people are not paying attention and are sending code-of-conduct comments to
all lists, not just pgsql-general, but -hackers and -advocacy too.
I've seen 3 of these so far today.
This is a reminder to please send the comments to pgsql-general only.
-- Darren Duncan
On 2018-06-03 11:29
On Jun 3, 2018, at 16:08 , Gavin Flower wrote:
>
> Be very careful in attempting to codify 'correct' behaviour!
+1 this is a distraction.
I finally got back to this; thanks everyone for reviews;
I also added completion for parenthesized explain (...)
d4382c4ae7ea1e272f4fee388aac8ff99421471a
and for ALTER TABLE SET (toast_tuple_target).
c2513365a0a85e77d3c21adb92fe12cfbe0d1897
BTW..should that be toast.tuple_target ??
Note that
On 04/06/18 07:32, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 06/03/2018 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Two years ago, there was considerable discussion about creating a
Code of Conduct for the Postgres community, as a result of which
the core team announced a plan to create an exploration committee
to draft a CoC
On 06/03/2018 11:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Tomas Vondra writes:
The main remaining question I have is what do do with back-branches.
Shall we back-patch this or not?
Given the behavioral changes involved, I'd say "no way". That's
reinforced by the lack of field complaints; if there were lots
Tomas Vondra writes:
> The main remaining question I have is what do do with back-branches.
> Shall we back-patch this or not?
Given the behavioral changes involved, I'd say "no way". That's
reinforced by the lack of field complaints; if there were lots of
complaints, maybe we'd be willing to
Hi Emre,
Thanks for the rebased patch. I remember reviewing the patch in the last
CF, and it seems in a pretty good shape. I plan to look at it again in
the next commitfest, but it seems to have been reviewed by other
experienced people so I'm not worried about this part.
The main remaining
Hi Teodor,
Thanks for the patch. This (missing) optimization popped-up repeatedly
recently, and I was planning to look into it for PG12. So now I don't
have to, because you've done all the hard work ;-)
I've have done only very basic review so far, but ISTM the general
approach of
On 06/03/2018 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Two years ago, there was considerable discussion about creating a
Code of Conduct for the Postgres community, as a result of which
the core team announced a plan to create an exploration committee
to draft a CoC [1]. That process has taken far longer than
Hi,
On 2018-06-03 15:17:34 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2018-Jun-03, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > I'd even start out with something more minimal, in the interest of
> > incremental forward progress. I think we'd basically need a reference
> > to:
> >
> > a) the original source code lives on
On 2018-Jun-03, Andres Freund wrote:
> I'd even start out with something more minimal, in the interest of
> incremental forward progress. I think we'd basically need a reference
> to:
>
> a) the original source code lives on git.pg.o - sites like github are
>just mirrors.
> b) commitfest app
Two years ago, there was considerable discussion about creating a
Code of Conduct for the Postgres community, as a result of which
the core team announced a plan to create an exploration committee
to draft a CoC [1]. That process has taken far longer than expected,
but the committee has not been
2018-06-03 19:16 GMT+02:00 David G. Johnston :
> On Sunday, June 3, 2018, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>
>>
>> \pset fieldsep ;
>> \pset format csv
>>
>> I don't like when one command overwrite settings of some other command.
>> We can introduce some similar like GUC where default values from configure
On 2018-06-03 13:30:58 -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>
> > On Jun 1, 2018, at 6:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
> > On 2018-Jun-01, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> >
> >> This would also coincide well with the content we want to move from
> >> the wiki to www.
> >
> > What content is that?
>
>
> On Jun 1, 2018, at 6:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2018-Jun-01, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>
>> This would also coincide well with the content we want to move from
>> the wiki to www.
>
> What content is that?
Per a discussion at the developer meeting, basically the “locked content”
on
From: Tom Lane
The core team is pleased to announce the appointment of seven
new Postgres committers:
Congratulations to 7 cool generals! Let's help new committers by
doing good review and test, and let's aim for committers.
FYI, I had a quick look at how many years the new committers have
On Sunday, June 3, 2018, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>
> \pset fieldsep ;
> \pset format csv
>
> I don't like when one command overwrite settings of some other command. We
> can introduce some similar like GUC where default values from configure
> file can be overwritten by custom setting for session.
Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> writes:
> Just to clarify for myself, for evaluating any stable function here would it
> be
> enough to handle all function-like expressions (FuncExpr / OpExpr /
> DistinctExpr / NullIfExpr) and check a corresponding function for provolatile,
> like in the
Hi
2018-04-07 14:23 GMT+02:00 Daniel Verite :
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> > Another thought: Isn't CSV just the same as unaligned output plus some
> > quoting? Could we add a quote character setting and then define --csv
> > to be quote-character = " and fieldsep = , ?
>
> Plus footer
> On 1 June 2018 at 17:53, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ashutosh Bapat writes:
>> I think the patch is right if we were to handle only SQLValueFunction,
>> but the bigger picture here is that we aren't evaluating stable
>> functions before run-time partition pruning happens.
>
> I agree though that it
On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 05:20:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas writes:
>> On 02/06/18 17:09, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> More concerning is that RHEL6 is on 1.0.1e:
>
>> I was only thinking of requiring 1.0.2 on Windows.
>
> Ah. Personally, I don't care about that case, but maybe
On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 05:05:11PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> The core team is pleased to announce the appointment of seven
> new Postgres committers:
>
> Etsuro Fujita
> Peter Geoghegan
> Amit Kapila
> Alexander Korotkov
> Thomas Munro
> Michael Paquier
> Tomas Vondra
>
> Congratulations to all!
On 2 June 2018 at 22:46, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
And that is why both XL and "FDW approach" rely on a central coordinator.
>>>
>>> I don't think we ever specified that "FDW approach" "relies" on a
>>> central coordinator. One could configure and setup a cluster with
>>> multiple coordinators
26 matches
Mail list logo
