Moon, Insung wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 8:52 PM Antonin Houska wrote:
> >
> > Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 3:01 PM Antonin Houska wrote:
> > > > However the design doesn't seem to be stable enough at the
> > > > moment for coding to make sense.
> > >
>
"Jordan Deitch" writes:
> ALTER SYSTEM currently does not raise error upon invalid entry.
You mean on invalid combinations of entries.
Take for example:
> alter system set superuser_reserved_connections = 10;
> ALTER SYSTEM
> alter system set max_connections = 5;
> ALTER SYSTEM
> The database
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:45 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 1:48 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 12:28 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> > > I would say that sucks, because it makes it harder to set
> > > maintenance_work_mem correctly. Not sure how hard it
Hi all,
ALTER SYSTEM currently does not raise error upon invalid entry. Take for
example:
alter system set superuser_reserved_connections = 10;
> ALTER SYSTEM
alter system set max_connections = 5;
> ALTER SYSTEM
The database will now fail to restart without manual intervention by way of
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 01:47:57PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:55:21PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 05:40:08PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > >> I would argue to include in 12.1, since 12 is what most everyone will
>
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 8:55 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 4:18 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 7:29 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 9:31 PM Amit Kapila
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> One comment:
Thank you for reviewing this patch.
On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 4:36 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> Few more comments
>
>
> 1.
> +static int
> +compute_parallel_workers(Relation onerel, int nrequested, int nindexes)
> +{
> + int parallel_workers;
> + bool leaderparticipates = true;
>
> Seems like this function is
Hello.
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 8:52 PM Antonin Houska wrote:
>
> Robert Haas wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 3:01 PM Antonin Houska wrote:
> > > However the design doesn't seem to be stable enough at the
> > > moment for coding to make sense.
> >
> > Well, I think the question is whether
Christoph Berg writes:
> Re: Tom Lane 2018-09-28
>> Remove pqsignal() from libpq's official exports list.
> This is starting to hurt in several places:
> 04 11:41 mha@xindi:~$ psql
> 04 11:41 /usr/lib/postgresql/9.2/bin/psql: symbol lookup error:
>
Hi,
> IMV, and not unlike other similar cases I've talked about on another
> thread, these should be cleared when the system is promoted as they're
> otherwise confusing and nonsensical.
Keep in mind that this also happens when the server crashes and has to
perform crash recovery. In that case
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 7:52 AM Antonin Houska wrote:
> * Temporary files (buffile.c): we derive the IV from PID of the process that
> created the file + segment number + block within the segment. This
> information does not change if you need to write the same block again. If
> new IV
Hi,
On 2019-10-07 12:14:52 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > - if (portal->status == PORTAL_READY)
> > - MarkPortalFailed(portal);
> >
> > Why it is safe to remove this check? It has been explained in commit
> > 7981c342 why we need that check. I don't see any explanation in email
> > or patch
Greetings,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Andrew Gierth writes:
> > "Tom" == Tom Lane writes:
> > Tom> Perhaps we could change the back branches so that they interpret
> > Tom> "-f -" as "write to stdout", but without enforcing that you use
> > Tom> that syntax.
>
> > We should
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:38 PM Isaac Morland wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 03:15, Anders Åstrand wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> Attached is a patch for adding uri as an encoding option for
>> encode/decode. It uses what's called "percent-encoding" in rfc3986
>>
Greetings,
* Martín Marqués (mar...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> pg_last_wal_receive_lsn()
> pg_last_wal_replay_lsn()
> pg_last_xact_replay_timestamp()
>
> Under normal circumstances we would expect to receive NULLs from all
> three functions on a primary node, and code comments back up my
Greetings,
* Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote:
> Unless we are *absolutely* certain, I bet someone will be able to find a
> side-channel that somehow leaks some data or data-about-data, if we don't
> encrypt everything. If nothing else, you can get use patterns out of it,
> and you can
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 9:52 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 09:14:38AM +0200, Anders Åstrand wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > Attached is a patch for adding uri as an encoding option for
> > encode/decode. It uses what's called "percent-encoding" in rfc3986
> >
Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:03:03PM +0530, Natarajan R wrote:
> >I want to read pg_database from pg_init...
> >
> >Is using heap_open() is possible? or else any other way is there ?
>
> This is way too vague question - I have no idea what you mean by
> pg_init, for example.
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:03:03PM +0530, Natarajan R wrote:
I want to read pg_database from pg_init...
Is using heap_open() is possible? or else any other way is there ?
This is way too vague question - I have no idea what you mean by
pg_init, for example. And it's probably a good idea to
I want to read pg_database from pg_init...
Is using heap_open() is possible? or else any other way is there ?
Greetings,
* Fujii Masao (masao.fu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 10:58 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Having these options end up set but then hacking all of the other code
> > that looks at them to check if we're actually in recovery or not would
> > end up being both confusing to
On Thu, 11 Jul 2019 at 04:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 9:59 AM Dave Cramer wrote:
> >> I'm still a bit conflicted about what to do with search_path as I do
> believe this is potentially a security issue.
> >> It may be that we always want to report that
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 at 01:27, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> We have steadfastly refused to provide protocol-level tools for things
> like "please change my user ID, and don't let anyone change it again
> via SQL," and that's a huge problem for things like connection poolers
> which can't parse all the
Hi,
I apologize for the mistake.
For the mailing list correspondence I created this mail account. But I
forgot to change the sender name. So, the "postgres" name appeared as
sender name in the mailing list. I changed it.
Kind regards,
Mark/S-Man42
Hi,
some days ago I ran into a problem
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 10:58 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 9:14 AM Fujii Masao wrote:
> > > Agreed, too. Do you have any idea to implement that? I've not found out
> > > "smart" way to do that yet.
> > >
> > >
Amit Kapila writes:
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:57 PM vignesh C wrote:
>> I noticed that some of the header files inclusion is not ordered as
>> per the usual standard that is followed.
>> The attached patch contains the fix for the order in which the header
>> files are included.
>> Let me know
Greetings,
* Anastasia Lubennikova (a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru) wrote:
> Cool. It seems that everyone agrees on this patch.
Thanks for working on this, I took a quick look over it and I do have
some concerns.
> I attached the updated version. Now it prints a better error message
> and
Greetings,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 9:14 AM Fujii Masao wrote:
> > Agreed, too. Do you have any idea to implement that? I've not found out
> > "smart" way to do that yet.
> >
> > One idea is, as Michael suggested, to use SetConfigOption() for all the
Hi,
some days ago I ran into a problem with the to_date() function. I
originally described it on StackExchange:
https://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/250111/unexpected-behaviour-for-to-date-with-week-number-and-week-day
The problem:
If you want to parse a date string with year, week and
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:12 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>
> Hi Ashutosh,
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 1:39 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > I think we could have first deleted all the dependency of child object
> > on parent and then deleted the child itself using performDeletion().
>
> So, there are two
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 3:01 PM Antonin Houska wrote:
> > However the design doesn't seem to be stable enough at the
> > moment for coding to make sense.
>
> Well, I think the question is whether working further on your patch
> could produce some things that everyone would
Hi everyone,
like the others before me we (the university of Münster) are happy to
see this feature as well. Thank you this.
When I applied the patch two weeks ago I run into the issue that initdb
did not recognize the new parameters (collation-provider and icu-locale)
but I guess it was caused
В письме от вторник, 8 октября 2019 г. 16:00:49 MSK пользователь Amit Langote
написал:
> > > > The idea of this patch is following: If you read the code, partitioned
> > > > tables do not have any options (you will not find
> > > > RELOPT_KIND_PARTITIONED
> > > > in boolRelOpts, intRelOpts,
В письме от понедельник, 7 октября 2019 г. 12:59:27 MSK пользователь Robert
Haas написал:
> > This thread is a follow up to the thread
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2620882.s52SJui4ql@x200m where I've
> > been trying to remove StdRdOptions structure and replace it with unique
> >
В письме от понедельник, 7 октября 2019 г. 18:55:20 MSK пользователь Dent John
написал:
> I like the new approach. And I agree with the ambition — to split out the
> representation from StdRdOptions.
Thanks.
> However, with that change, in the AM’s *options() function, it looks as if
> you
Ants Aasma wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 18:02, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> Well, do to encryption properly, there is the requirement of the nonce.
>> If you ever rewrite a bit, you technically have to have a new nonce.
>> For WAL, since it is append-only, you can use the WAL file name.
On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 3:10 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2019-10-04 17:08:29 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > > On 2019-10-04 16:31:29 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >> Yeah, it is certainly weird that you have to assign the first array
> > >> element to get the rest to be
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 19:46, Joe Nelson wrote:
>
> David Rowley wrote:
> > The translation string here must be consistent over all platforms. I
> > think this will cause issues if the translation string uses %ld and
> > the platform requires %lld?
>
> A very good and subtle point. I'll change it
On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 18:02, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Well, do to encryption properly, there is the requirement of the nonce.
> If you ever rewrite a bit, you technically have to have a new nonce.
> For WAL, since it is append-only, you can use the WAL file name. For
> heap/index files, we change
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 6:15 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Apologies for not helping much here; I'm on vacation for a couple of
> weeks.
No worries, please take your time.
> On 2019-Oct-08, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > I couldn't imagine how that trick could be implemented for this case. :(
>
> Can't
Apologies for not helping much here; I'm on vacation for a couple of
weeks.
On 2019-Oct-08, Amit Langote wrote:
> I couldn't imagine how that trick could be implemented for this case. :(
Can't we pass around an ObjectAddresses pointer to which each recursion
level adds the object(s) it wants to
Moon-san, kuroda.keisuke-san
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:20 AM, Moon, Insung wrote:
> =# CREATE INDEX foo_idx ON foo USING gin (i jsonb_ops);
> =# SELECT * FROM gin_metapage_info(get_raw_page('foo_idx', 0)) WITH
> (fastupdate=off);
This is not important thing but some mistakes are here.
=#
Hi, Alvaro
>
>The last patch we got here (a prototype) was almost a year ago. There was
>substantial discussion about it, but no new version of the patch has been
>posted. Are
>we getting a proper patch soon, or did we give up on the approach entirely?
I'm sorry for the late response. I
On 2019-10-07 08:52, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 04:35:59PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> As of d9dd406fe281d22d5238d3c26a7182543c711e74, we require MSVC 2013,
>> which means _MSC_VER >= 1800. This means that conditionals about
>> older versions of _MSC_VER can be removed
Hi Ashutosh,
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 1:39 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> I think we could have first deleted all the dependency of child object
> on parent and then deleted the child itself using performDeletion().
So, there are two objects to consider in this case -- column and an
index that
Hi, Konstantin
I'm very sorry for the late response and thank you for your feedback.
(I re-sent this email because my email address changed and couldn't deliver to
hackers.)
>From: Konstantin Knizhnik [mailto:k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru]
>
>Takeshi-san,
>
>I am sorry for late response - I just
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 13:18, Tom Lane wrote:
> Natarajan R writes:
> > Me: Thanks Tomas, But this is for that particular database only, I want
> > to get the *list of database Id's* on which my extension is installed
> > during *PG_INIT* itself...
>
> You can't. In the first place, that
Hello,
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 6:43 PM Nikolay Shaplov wrote:
> В письме от понедельник, 7 октября 2019 г. 14:57:14 MSK пользователь Michael
> Paquier написал:
> > On Sun, Oct 06, 2019 at 03:47:46PM +0300, Nikolay Shaplov wrote:
> > > The idea of this patch is following: If you read the code,
David Rowley wrote:
> It's not for this patch to decide what ports clients can connect to
> PostgreSQL on. As far as I'm aware Windows has no restrictions on what
> ports unprivileged users can listen on. I think we're likely going to
> upset a handful of people if we block the client tools from
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:57 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that some of the header files inclusion is not ordered as
> per the usual standard that is followed.
> The attached patch contains the fix for the order in which the header
> files are included.
> Let me know your thoughts on
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 11:06 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 02:14:05PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > Sorry Michael for the miscommunication, the patch was present in the
> > first mail of this mail thread.
> > I'm re-attaching the patch in this mail.
> > Let me know if
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 12:57 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 6:55 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > We wanted to decide how a parallel vacuum should use memory? Can each
> > worker consume maintenance_work_mem to clean up the gin Index or all
> > workers should use no more than
52 matches
Mail list logo
