On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 11:13 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 11:30:39AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > In the past, I think there's was talk that maybe someone would invent a
> > clever
> > way to dynamically combine all the partitions' statistics, so analyzing the
> > paren
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 01:17, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 12:21 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > I agree with both patches.
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> > For the first fix it seems better to push down the logic to the page
> > deletion code as your 0001 patch does so. The
Hello,
more random thoughts about syntax, semantics, and keeping it relational.
While I'm not a huge fan of it, one of the other databases implementing
this functionality does so using the syntax:
WITH ITERATIVE R AS '(' R0 ITERATE Ri UNTIL N (ITERATIONS | UPDATES) ')' Qf
Where N in ITERATI
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:33:26PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> This looks good to me, except that
>
> xreflabel="ssl-min-protocol-version"
>
> etc. needs to be changed to use underscores.
Indeed, thanks. I have fixed this part and applied the patch.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 09:37:41AM +0800, Richard Guo wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 8:11 AM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:>
>> FWIW it'd be better to send the patch to the original thread instead of
>> starting a new one.
>
> Ah yes, you're right. Sorry for not doing so.
FWIW, I don't find the move fr
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 12:26 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> Yeah, I think the question is what are the expected benefits of using
> raw devices. It might be an interesting exercise / experiment, but my
> understanding is that most of the benefits can be achieved by using file
> systems but with direct
On 4/29/20 11:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
>> Clearly I was caught doing a single browser test (Chrome).
>
> Well, I've not tested anything but Safari, either ...
>
>> Reverted back to the verbose way sans !important, attached, which
>> appears to be the consensus. If you
Hi:
For a given level for join_search_one_level, it is always try to join
every relation
in joinrel[level-1] to *initial_rels*. but the current code doesn't show
this directly.
join_search_one_level
if (level == 2) /* consider remaining
initial rels */
> "Laurenz" == Laurenz Albe writes:
Laurenz> I played with a silly example and got a result that surprises
Laurenz> me:
Laurenz> WITH RECURSIVE fib AS (
Laurenz> SELECT n, "fibₙ"
Laurenz> FROM (VALUES (1, 1::bigint), (2, 1)) AS f(n,"fibₙ")
Laurenz> UNION ALL
Lau
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> Clearly I was caught doing a single browser test (Chrome).
Well, I've not tested anything but Safari, either ...
> Reverted back to the verbose way sans !important, attached, which
> appears to be the consensus. If you can ACK this, I'll commit.
This one works for m
I played with a silly example and got a result that surprises me:
WITH RECURSIVE fib AS (
SELECT n, "fibₙ"
FROM (VALUES (1, 1::bigint), (2, 1)) AS f(n,"fibₙ")
UNION ALL
SELECT max(n) + 1,
sum("fibₙ")::bigint
FROM (SELECT n, "fibₙ"
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:36 PM Juan José Santamaría Flecha
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 3:50 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:57 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>> >
>> > 2. I think the code in IsoLocaleName is quite confusing and difficult
>> > to understand in back branches a
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 7:38 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 1:22 PM Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> >
>
> > I agree with that definition. I can send a cleanup patch if there's
> > no objection.
> >
>
> Okay, feel free to send the patch. Thanks for taking the initiative
> to write a p
On 4/29/20 10:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
>> Please see latest attached. I've eliminated the !important, condensed
>> the CSS, and the desultory (yes, my word of the week) testing did not
>> find issues in devel or earlier versions.
>
>> Please let me know if this works fo
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> Please see latest attached. I've eliminated the !important, condensed
> the CSS, and the desultory (yes, my word of the week) testing did not
> find issues in devel or earlier versions.
> Please let me know if this works for you. If it does, I'll push it up to
> pgweb
At Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:58:16 -0400, Alvaro Herrera
wrote in
> On 2020-Apr-28, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > On 2020-Apr-28, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> >
> > > > Anyway I think this patch should fix it also -- instead of adding a new
> > > > flag, we just rely on the existing flags (since do_chec
On 4/29/20 9:22 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> On 4/29/20 8:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
>>> On 4/29/20 7:40 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
I'll compromise on the temporary importants, but first I want to see
what's causing the need for it. Do you have a suggestion on
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 8:11 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 03:51:40PM +0800, Richard Guo wrote:
> >Hi hackers,
> >
> >Per discussion in [1], we don't need to strip relabel for the expr
> >explicitly before calling pull_varnos() to retrieve all mentioned
> >relids. pull_varnos()
On 2020-Apr-30, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Tue, 28 Apr 2020 20:47:10 -0400, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote in
> > /*
> > * After the sanity checks in CreateDecodingContext, make sure
> > the
> > * restart_lsn is valid. Avoid "cannot get changes" wording in
>
Thank you for polishing and committing this.
At Tue, 28 Apr 2020 20:47:10 -0400, Alvaro Herrera
wrote in
> I pushed this one. Some closing remarks:
>
> On 2020-Apr-28, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > On 2020-Apr-28, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>
> > > Agreed to describe what is failed rather than
On 4/29/20 8:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
>> On 4/29/20 7:40 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>>> I'll compromise on the temporary importants, but first I want to see
>>> what's causing the need for it. Do you have a suggestion on a page to test?
>
> I haven't yet pushed anythin
Tomas Vondra writes:
> Yeah, I think the question is what are the expected benefits of using
> raw devices. It might be an interesting exercise / experiment, but my
> understanding is that most of the benefits can be achieved by using file
> systems but with direct I/O and async I/O, which would a
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 8:10 AM Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> It would require quite a bit of work since 1) PostgreSQL stores its data
> in multiple files and 2) PostgreSQL currently supports only synchronous
> buffered IO.
>
> To get the performance benefits from using raw devices I think you would
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:10:51PM +0200, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
On 4/28/20 10:43 AM, Benjamin Schaller wrote:
for an university project I'm currently doing some research on
PostgreSQL. I was wondering if hypothetically it would be possible
to implement a raw device system to PostgreSQL. I kno
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:43 PM David Zhang wrote:
> Hi hackers,
>
> I found two email threads below,
>
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b0d099ca-f9c3-00ed-0c95-4d7a9f7c97fc%402ndquadrant.com
>
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2B4BxBwBHmDkSpgvnfG_Ps1SEeYhDRuLpr1AvdbUwFh-otTg8
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 03:51:40PM +0800, Richard Guo wrote:
Hi hackers,
Per discussion in [1], we don't need to strip relabel for the expr
explicitly before calling pull_varnos() to retrieve all mentioned
relids. pull_varnos() would recurse into T_RelabelType nodes.
Add a patch to remove that
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:56 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> I'm not sure I see the advantage. Only doing so in the freezing case
> seems unlikely to cause additional conflicts, but I'm less sure about
> doing it always. btpo.xact will often be quite recent, right? So it'd
> likely cause more conflicts.
On 4/29/20 7:40 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> On 4/29/20 7:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> After further fooling with this issue, I've determined that
>>
>> (1) I need to be able to use environments within the
>> func_table_entry cells and have them render more-or-less normally.
>> There doesn't seem to
Hi hackers,
I found two email threads below,
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b0d099ca-f9c3-00ed-0c95-4d7a9f7c97fc%402ndquadrant.com
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2B4BxBwBHmDkSpgvnfG_Ps1SEeYhDRuLpr1AvdbUwFh-otTg8A%40mail.gmail.com
and I understood "OUT parameters in procedures
On 4/29/20 7:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> After further fooling with this issue, I've determined that
>
> (1) I need to be able to use environments within the
> func_table_entry cells and have them render more-or-less normally.
> There doesn't seem to be any other good way to render multiline
> examp
After further fooling with this issue, I've determined that
(1) I need to be able to use environments within the
func_table_entry cells and have them render more-or-less normally.
There doesn't seem to be any other good way to render multiline
example results for set-returning functions ... but m
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 01:57:49PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Working in the TLS corners of the backend, I found while re-reviewing and
> re-testing for the release that this patch actually was a small, but vital,
> brick shy of a load. The error handling is always invoked due to a set of
>
On 2020-Apr-28, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2020-Apr-28, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>
> > > Anyway I think this patch should fix it also -- instead of adding a new
> > > flag, we just rely on the existing flags (since do_checkpoint must have
> > > been set correctly from the flags earlier in that bl
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 12:21 AM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
> For the first fix it seems better to push down the logic to the page
> deletion code as your 0001 patch does so. The following change changes
> the page deletion code so that it emits LOG message indicating the
> index corruption when a del
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:54 PM Jonah H. Harris
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:50 PM Corey Huinker
> wrote:
>
>> Having both WHERE and WHILE might look awkward.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe an UNTIL instead of WHILE?
>>
>
> While I'm not a huge fan of it, one of the other databases implementing
> this fu
Hi,
On 2020-04-29 13:40:55 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 12:54 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > Fundamentally, btvacuumpage() doesn't freeze 32-bit XIDs (from
> > > bpto.xact) when it recycles deleted pages. It simply puts them in the
> > > FSM without changing anything abo
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:50 PM Corey Huinker
wrote:
> Having both WHERE and WHILE might look awkward.
>>
>
> Maybe an UNTIL instead of WHILE?
>
While I'm not a huge fan of it, one of the other databases implementing
this functionality does so using the syntax:
WITH ITERATIVE R AS '(' R0 ITERAT
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:04 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> As a bonus, we now have an easy correctness cross-check: if some
> random piece of nbtree code lands on a page (having followed a
> downlink or sibling link) that is marked recycled, then clearly
> something is very wrong -- throw a "can't h
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 1:40 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I'm not sure how low the costs would be, but at least we'd only have
> to do it once per already-deleted page (i.e. only the first time a
> VACUUM operation found _bt_page_eligible_for_recycling() returned true
> for the page and marked it r
>
>
> > Perhaps something like this would be more readable
> >
> > WITH t AS (
> >UPDATE ( SELECT 1 AS ctr, 'x' as val )
> >SET ctr = ctr + 1, val = val || 'x'
> >WHILE ctr <= 100
> >RETURNING ctr, val
> > )
> >
> > The notion of an UPDATE on an ephemeral subquery isn't that special
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 12:54 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Fundamentally, btvacuumpage() doesn't freeze 32-bit XIDs (from
> > bpto.xact) when it recycles deleted pages. It simply puts them in the
> > FSM without changing anything about the page itself. This means
> > surprisingly little in the cont
On 2020-04-27 07:45, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 11:20:01PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
That was the preferred name by Michael too elsewhere in the thread, so went
ahead and made it so.
Thanks Daniel.
I would, however, prefer to also rename the internal symbols.
Done
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 3:15 PM Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Why are all the glossary terms capitalized? Seems kind of strange.
>
>
They weren't intended to be, and they don't appear to be in the page I'm
looking at. Are you referring to the anchor like in
https:/
Hi,
On 2020-04-29 11:28:00 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:27 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Sure, there is some pre-existing wraparound danger for individual
> > pages. But it's a pretty narrow corner case before INDEX_CLEANUP
> > off.
> >
> > That comment says something
Few comments seem to have dangling references to the behavior from pre-12 "WITH
OIDS". Maybe varsup.c should get a wider change?
diff --git a/src/backend/access/common/tupdesc.c
b/src/backend/access/common/tupdesc.c
index 1e743d7d86..ce84e22cbd 100644
--- a/src/backend/access/common/tupdesc.c
++
Why are all the glossary terms capitalized? Seems kind of strange.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
> On Apr 29, 2020, at 11:41 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 10:43 PM Mark Dilger
> wrote:
>> It's simple enough to extend the tap test a little to check for those
>> things. In v3, the tap test skips tests if the page size is not 8k, and
>> also if the tuples do not fall
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 12:30 PM Mark Dilger
wrote:
> Version 4 of this patch now includes boolean options skip_all_frozen and
> skip_all_visible.
I'm not sure sure, but maybe there should just be one argument with
three possible values, because skip_all_frozen = true and
skip_all_visible = fals
Hello Corey, Hello Peter,
My 0.02 € about the alternative syntaxes:
Peter:
I think a syntax that would fit better within the existing framework
would be something like
WITH RECURSIVE t AS (
SELECT base case
REPLACE ALL -- instead of UNION ALL
SELECT recursive case
)
A good po
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 10:43 PM Mark Dilger
wrote:
> It's simple enough to extend the tap test a little to check for those things.
> In v3, the tap test skips tests if the page size is not 8k, and also if the
> tuples do not fall on the page where expected (which would happen due to
> alignme
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:27 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> Sure, there is some pre-existing wraparound danger for individual
> pages. But it's a pretty narrow corner case before INDEX_CLEANUP
> off.
>
> That comment says something about "shared-memory free space map", making
> it sound like any crash
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> On 2020-Apr-29, Vinicius Abrahao wrote:
>> I'm opening this thread to clarify something that I can observe: duplicated
>> values for sequences.
> I'm not sure that a sequence that produces the same value twice, without
> writing it to the database the first time, and with
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 12:30 PM Mark Dilger
wrote:
> Do you think it would make sense to have the amcheck contrib module have, in
> addition to the SQL queriable functions, a bgworker based mode that
> periodically checks your database? The work along those lines is not
> included in v4, but
>> I wonder if a mode where heapcheck optionally would only checks
>> non-frozen (perhaps also non-all-visible) regions of a table would be a
>> good idea?
Version 4 of this patch now includes boolean options skip_all_frozen and
skip_all_visible.
>> Would make it a lot more viable to run this r
On 2020-Apr-29, Vinicius Abrahao wrote:
> Hello PG Hackers
>
> Hope you are well and safe!
>
> I'm opening this thread to clarify something that I can observe: duplicated
> values for sequences.
>
> [My understanding is that duplication is not something we desire. In fact
> it does NOT happen i
Hi,
I think it's not good that do_pg_start_backup() takes a flag which
tells it to call back into basebackup.c's sendTablespace(). This means
that details which ought to be private to basebackup.c leak out and
become visible to other parts of the code. This seems to have
originated in commit 72d42
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 3:50 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:57 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > 2. I think the code in IsoLocaleName is quite confusing and difficult
> > to understand in back branches and the changes due to this bug-fix
> > made it more complicated. I am think
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:34 AM Jonah H. Harris
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 7:22 AM Peter Eisentraut <
> peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah the RECURSIVE vs ITERATIVE is a bit of a red herring here. As you
>> say, the RECURSIVE keyword doesn't specify the processing but mar
Hello PG Hackers
Hope you are well and safe!
I'm opening this thread to clarify something that I can observe: duplicated
values for sequences.
[My understanding is that duplication is not something we desire. In fact
it does NOT happen in the majority of cases, for example, when you
immediately
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:34:24AM -0400, James Coleman wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:17 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:26:12AM -0400, James Coleman wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 7:05 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2020-04-28 18:22:20 -0400, James Coleman
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:17 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:26:12AM -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 7:05 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 2020-04-28 18:22:20 -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> >> > I cc'd Andres given his commit introduc
Antonin Houska wrote:
> Second, if a window function appeared in the result of
> make_partial_grouping_target() for any reason, the Agg node would fail to
> evaluate it. Am I wrong?
Well, this is PVC_RECURSE..., not PVC_INCLUDE..., so the window function
cannot appear in the result. But I still
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:26:12AM -0400, James Coleman wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 7:05 PM Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2020-04-28 18:22:20 -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> I cc'd Andres given his commit introduced simplehash, so I figured
> he'd probably have a few pointers on when each one
I think that the PVC_RECURSE_WINDOWFUNCS flag shouldn't be used in
make_partial_grouping_target().
First, this function uses the grouping_target (see grouping_planner()) as the
input, and that should only contain the input expressions of window functions
as opposed to the window functions themselv
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 7:22 AM Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Yeah the RECURSIVE vs ITERATIVE is a bit of a red herring here. As you
> say, the RECURSIVE keyword doesn't specify the processing but marks the
> fact that the specification of the query is recursive.
>
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 7:05 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2020-04-28 18:22:20 -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> > I cc'd Andres given his commit introduced simplehash, so I figured
> > he'd probably have a few pointers on when each one might be useful.
> > [...]
> > Do you have any thoughts
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:57 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
>
> 2. I think the code in IsoLocaleName is quite confusing and difficult
> to understand in back branches and the changes due to this bug-fix
> made it more complicated. I am thinking to refactor it such that the
> code for (_MSC_VER >= 1700 &
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 8:34 AM Andy Fan wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 8:29 AM David Rowley wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 at 14:17, Andy Fan wrote:
>> > V6 also includes:
>> > 1. Fix the comment misleading you mentioned above.
>> > 2. Fixed a concern case for `relation_has_uniquekeys
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 4:50 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> I think we should backpatch this till 9.5 as I could see the changes
> made by commit 0fb54de9 to support MSVC2015 are present in that branch
> and the same is mentioned in the commit message.
>
Today, I was thinking about the pros and cons o
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:39 PM Juan José Santamaría Flecha
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 1:20 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
>> I think we should backpatch this till 9.5 as I could see the changes
>> made by commit 0fb54de9 to support MSVC2015 are present in that branch
>> and the same is ment
Working in the TLS corners of the backend, I found while re-reviewing and
re-testing for the release that this patch actually was a small, but vital,
brick shy of a load. The error handling is always invoked due to a set of
missing braces. Going into the check will cause the context to be freed a
On 4/29/20 8:52 AM, 曾文旌 wrote:
Fixed the error message to make the expression more accurate. In v33.
Thanks wenjing
Please refer this scenario , where getting an error while performing
cluster o/p
1)
X terminal -
postgres=# create global temp table f(n int);
CREATE TABLE
Y Terminal -
p
On 2020-04-29 07:09, Fabien COELHO wrote:
I'm wondering about how to use such a feature in the context of WITH query
with several queries having different behaviors. Currently "WITH"
introduces a named-query (like a view), "WITH RECURSIVE" introduces a mix
of recursive and named queries, pg reall
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
The idea and the patch looks good to me.
It makes sense to chan
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:56 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 3:55 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 3:11 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 4:05 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > > >
> > > [latest patches]
> > >
> > > v16-0004-Gracefully-hand
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 3:55 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 3:11 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 4:05 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > >
> > [latest patches]
> >
> > v16-0004-Gracefully-handle-concurrent-aborts-of-uncommitt
> > - Any actions leading to trans
Hi hackers,
Per discussion in [1], we don't need to strip relabel for the expr
explicitly before calling pull_varnos() to retrieve all mentioned
relids. pull_varnos() would recurse into T_RelabelType nodes.
Add a patch to remove that and simplify the code a bit.
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/me
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 12:37 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 11:15, Mahendra Singh Thalor
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 11:55, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 2:28 PM Erik Rijkers wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 2020-04-23 05:24, Dilip Kum
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 11:15, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 11:55, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 2:28 PM Erik Rijkers wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2020-04-23 05:24, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 9:31 PM Erik Rijkers wrote:
> > > >>
>
79 matches
Mail list logo
