On 15/09/18 08:17, Tom Lane wrote:
Yeah, this. The PG community is mostly nice people, AFAICT. I'll be
astonished (and worried) if the CoC committee finds much to do. We're
implementing this mostly to make newcomers to the project feel that
it's a safe space.
Agreed. However I think the a
On 9/14/18 11:13 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 11:10 AM, Dave Page wrote:
That wording has been in the published draft for 18 months, and noone
objected to it that I'm aware of. There will always be people who don't like
some of the wording, much as there are often people who d
Noah Misch writes:
> Usually, the first srandom() call happens early in PostmasterMain(). I plan
> to add one to InitStandaloneProcess(), which substitutes for several tasks
> otherwise done in PostmasterMain(). That seems like a good thing even if DSM
> weren't in the picture. Also, initdb nee
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:07:43AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2013-10-30 08:45:03 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> If I'm reading this correctly, the last three runs on frogmouth have
> >> all failed, and all of them have failed with a co
> "Andrew" == Andrew Gierth writes:
Andrew> So what I propose to do is to commit a cleaned-up version of
Andrew> the patch posted above, with these changes:
Andrew> - install all the plpy_*.h headers, not just a few; I know of no
reason
Andrew>to exclude any of them, and in the abs
> On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 at 21:36, Alexander Kuzmenkov
> wrote:
>
> El 13/09/18 a las 18:39, Jesper Pedersen escribió:
>
>> I think we can improve this,
>> and the skip scan can be strictly faster than index scan regardless of
>> the data. As a first approximation, imagine that we somehow skipped
>>
> "Andrew" == Andrew Gierth writes:
Andrew> Here's a patch that fixes (not necessarily in the best way) the
Andrew> PGXS builds of all the contrib/*_pl{perl,python} modules.
Andrew> Oh, obviously this patch doesn't fix the windows Install.pm
Andrew> yet, but that'd be easier to do after
Hi,
On 2018-09-15 11:41:58 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> I'll email the folks that have LLVM enabled in the BF, to also do so.
Done so. I'll try to check-in again tonight, but while likely, it's not
certain there'll be reception.
- Andres
On 2018-09-15 14:19:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On September 15, 2018 12:14:07 PM MDT, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Is there more that has to be done than switching the GUC's default
> >> value and adjusting docs? I could probably make it happen if there's
> >> not any hidden s
Andres Freund writes:
> On September 15, 2018 12:14:07 PM MDT, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Is there more that has to be done than switching the GUC's default
>> value and adjusting docs? I could probably make it happen if there's
>> not any hidden stuff to worry about.
> No, that should be all. I'll ad
Hi,
On September 15, 2018 12:14:07 PM MDT, Tom Lane wrote:
>Andres Freund writes:
>> Cool, sounds we have agreement. I'll try to come up with a patch.
>I'm [un]fortunately hiking till Wednesday, so I won't have an easy time
>to push a patch. I probably could push something tomorrow, but I'
Andres Freund writes:
> Cool, sounds we have agreement. I'll try to come up with a patch. I'm
> [un]fortunately hiking till Wednesday, so I won't have an easy time to push a
> patch. I probably could push something tomorrow, but I'd have a hard time
> cleaning up if needed. Does anybody fee
On September 15, 2018 8:26:17 AM MDT, Andrew Dunstan
wrote:
>
>
>On 09/14/2018 08:18 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'd go with #2, personally. It does seem that the costing needs
>work,
>>> but it's not clear to me that we know what to cha
lback)
> o LET var = DEFAULT -- reset specified variable
>
>
fix some forgotten warnings and dependency issue
few more tests
Regards
Pavel
> Regards
>
> Pavel
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Dean
>>
>
schema-variables-20180915-01.patch.gz
Description: application/gzip
Hi,
On 9/12/18 1:34 PM, Michael Banck wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 11:08:52AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> I have committed the first draft of the Postgres 11 release notes. I
>> will add more markup soon. You can view the most current version here:
>>
>> http://momjian.us/pg
On 09/14/2018 08:18 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I'd go with #2, personally. It does seem that the costing needs work,
but it's not clear to me that we know what to change, so it's kinda
late to propose #3 for v11.
+1. I also favor option #2.
The author hasn't replied, but the attached seems to have cured the
bitrot so that it at least applies. Let's see what the cfbot makes of
it and then possibly fix any Windows issues.
The patch was not applying cleanly anymore for me, so here is a rebase of
your latest version.
Morever, IST
On 2018-Sep-14, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > On 2018-Jul-04, Amit Langote wrote:
> >> I think we may have simply forgotten to do $subject in the following
> >> commit.
>
> > We did. Pushed now, thanks.
>
> Erm, shouldn't that have been done in HEAD as well as v11?
Hmm, the co
Dear all,
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 5:18 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > It's not clear to me that there IS a general consensus here. It looks
> > to me like the unelected core team got together and decided to impose
> > a vaguely-worded code of conduct on a vaguely-defined group of
On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 12:29 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2018-Sep-15, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 4:27 PM, 李海龙 wrote:
>
>> > When I enable the parameter track_commit_timestamp in postgresql.conf of a
>> > Base Backup (making a Base Backup from a standby and the
>> > tr
The idea of allowing a WHERE clause to be appended to REFRESH MATERIALIZED
VIEW seems useful.
It would enable those that know well the pattern of data modification in
their underlying use case to schedule delta-updates (say, from crontab).
And also it would be a useful as a foundation for more am
21 matches
Mail list logo
