Hello!
When parameter cannot be changed without restarting the server postgresql
write:
"LOG: configuration file "/var/lib/postgresql/data/postgresql.auto.conf"
contains errors; unaffected changes were applied"
May be not write this string to LOG?
This string confuses people. If all log send to EL
Hello Masahiko-san,
I am sharing here a document patch based on top of kms_v10 that was
shared awhile back. This document patch aims to cover more design
details of the current KMS design and to help people understand KMS
better. Please let me know if you have any more comments.
A few quest
This thread is a follow-up of thread [1] where I don't have a good writing
to
describe the issue and solution in my mind. So I start this thread to fix
that
and also enrich the topic by taking the advices from Ashutosh, Tomas and
Tom.
Inaccurate statistics is not avoidable and can cause lots of is
Hi Michael,
> Wouldn't it be just better to remove this hardcoded superuser check
> and replace it with equivalent ACLs by default? The trick is to make
> sure that any function calling replorigin_check_prerequisites() has
> its execution correctly revoked from public. See for example
> e79350fe
I noticed that the PostgreSQL entry in a pan-database feature matrix by
Modern SQL was not reflecting the reality of our features.[1]
It turns out that test case used by the author produced an error which
the tool took to mean the feature was not implemented. I don't have the
actual test, but her
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 01:43:45PM +0600, Антон Пацев wrote:
> Hello!
> When parameter cannot be changed without restarting the server postgresql
> write:
> "LOG: configuration file "/var/lib/postgresql/data/postgresql.auto.conf"
> contains errors; unaffected changes were applied"
> May be not writ
Vik Fearing writes:
> postgres=# SELECT LAG(n, 1, -99) OVER (ORDER BY n)
> postgres-# FROM (VALUES (1.1), (2.2), (3.3)) AS v (n)
> postgres-# ORDER BY n;
> ERROR: function lag(numeric, integer, integer) does not exist
> LINE 1: SELECT LAG(n, 1, -99) OVER (ORDER BY n)
>^
On 5/31/20 9:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Vik Fearing writes:
>> postgres=# SELECT LAG(n, 1, -99) OVER (ORDER BY n)
>> postgres-# FROM (VALUES (1.1), (2.2), (3.3)) AS v (n)
>> postgres-# ORDER BY n;
>> ERROR: function lag(numeric, integer, integer) does not exist
>> LINE 1: SELECT LAG(n, 1,
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 2:54 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 02:38:53PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Indeed, looks good to me. I'll go fix, ust let's wait and see first
> > if others have any comments.
>
> Actually, I was reading again the new sentence, and did not like i
On 5/28/20, 11:42 PM, "matsumura@fujitsu.com"
wrote:
> I'm preparing a patch that backend inserting segment-crossboundary
> WAL record leaves its EndRecPtr and someone flushing it checks
> the EndRecPtr and notifies..
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I will be happy to take a look
at yo
On 5/31/20 9:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> When the anycompatible patch went in, I thought for a little bit about
> trying to use it with existing built-in functions, but didn't have the
> time to investigate the issue in detail. I'm not in favor of hacking
> things one-function-at-a-time here; we shou
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 02:49:46AM +, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 6:36 PM, Bruce Momjian < br...@momjian.us > wrote:
> > I am not excited about this new feature. Why do it only for
> > EXPLAIN? That is a log of GUCs. I can see this becoming a feature
> > creep disaster.
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 03:48:40PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Okay, I have switched the patch to do that. Any comments or
> objections?
Applied this one then. I also got to check the ODBC driver in more
details, and I am indeed not seeing those functions getting used.
One extra thing to kno
Vik Fearing writes:
> On 5/31/20 9:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> When the anycompatible patch went in, I thought for a little bit about
>> trying to use it with existing built-in functions, but didn't have the
>> time to investigate the issue in detail. I'm not in favor of hacking
>> things one-funct
On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 10:57:29AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Applied this one then. I also got to check the ODBC driver in more
> details, and I am indeed not seeing those functions getting used.
> One extra thing to know is that the ODBC driver requires libpq from at
> least 9.2, which may
Michael Paquier writes:
> Woah. This one is old, good catch from -DRELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE. It
> happens that since its introduction in a3519a2 from 2002,
> currtid_for_view() in tid.c closes the view and then looks at a RTE
> from it. I have reproduced the issue and the patch attached takes
> c
po 1. 6. 2020 v 4:07 odesílatel Tom Lane napsal:
> Vik Fearing writes:
> > On 5/31/20 9:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> When the anycompatible patch went in, I thought for a little bit about
> >> trying to use it with existing built-in functions, but didn't have the
> >> time to investigate the issu
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 10:26:54PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ugh. Aside from the stale-pointer-deref problem, once we drop the lock
> we can't even be sure the table still exists. +1 for back-patch.
Thanks. Fixed down to 9.5 then to make prion happier.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP
On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 08:04, Michael Paquier wrote:
> This stuff is interesting. Do you have some perf profiles to share?
> I am wondering what's the effect of the inlining with your test
> cases.
Below are the perf numbers for asignmany.sql :
HEAD :
+ 16.88% postgres postgres [
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 05:47:01PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 2:54 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> I don't understand why that change is an improvement.
Oops. I have managed to copy-paste an incorrect diff. The existing
comment is that:
* To prevent problems if the DH para
On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 11:11, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> I think so the effect of these patches strongly depends on CPU and compile
I quickly tried pi() with gcc 10 as well, and saw more or less the
same benefit. I think, we are bound to see some differences in the
benefits across architectures, kern
On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 17:13, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
>
> Hello Masahiko-san,
>
> >> I am sharing here a document patch based on top of kms_v10 that was
> >> shared awhile back. This document patch aims to cover more design
> >> details of the current KMS design and to help people understand KMS
>
po 1. 6. 2020 v 8:15 odesílatel Amit Khandekar
napsal:
> On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 11:11, Pavel Stehule
> wrote:
> > I think so the effect of these patches strongly depends on CPU and
> compile
>
> I quickly tried pi() with gcc 10 as well, and saw more or less the
> same benefit. I think, we are bo
On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 04:20, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 1:50 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > However, this usage has a downside that user secret can be logged to
> > server logs when log_statement = 'all' or an error happens. To deal
> > with this issue I've created a PoC pat
24 matches
Mail list logo
