I think the inconsistent behaviour reported in this thread gets
resolved with the approach and patch being discussed in [1].
>
> 1. In general, do we need to allow postmaster to send different
> signals to bgworkers for fast and smart shutdowns and let them
> differentiate the two modes(if
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 01:01:10PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
> Ah, right. For the moment I've added some empty conditionals for
> trigger and event trigger handling.
>
> I've created a new entry in the commitfest app. [1] I'll keep at it. :)
Thanks for the patch. I have reviewed and reworked it
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 6:38 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> I have pushed that patch last week and attached are the remaining
> patches. I have made a few changes in the next patch
> 0001-Extend-the-BufFile-interface.patch and have some comments on it
> which are as below:
Hi Amit,
I noticed that
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 at 22:27, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Thanks Robert for the review. Please find my comments inline below:
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 9:21 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 9:23 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> > wrote:
> > > Attached v4 patch fixes the latest comments
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 at 02:42, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2020-Aug-11, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 at 07:56, Alvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
>
> > > So if you have some table where tuples gain hint bits in bulk, and
> > > rarely modify the pages afterwards, and promote before
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:52 PM Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> Here's a rebased v27 that removes the current approach to ignore indexes that
> don't rely on a stable ordering. I'll start a new thread on that matter once
> the infrastructure pieces will be committed.
Thanks Julien. I'm planning to do
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 3:20 PM Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 11:14 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote:
> > As the result of a discussion with Fujita-san off-list, I'm going to
> > hold off development until he decides whether mine or Thomas' is
> > better.
>
> I'd like to join the
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 12:52 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> Here's a rebase.
And another, since I was too slow and v6 is already in conflict...
sorry for the high frequency patches.
From 1ced7b8c881676f21623c048f5e9e012ca8416ec Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Robert Haas
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 08:47:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Should we back-patch that? Usually I figure that people might want
> to build back PG branches on newer platforms at some point, so that
> it's useful to apply portability fixes across-the-board. On the
> other hand, since it's only a
Justin Pryzby writes:
> I can reproduce the issue with generated data:
> pryzbyj=# SELECT format('create table t%s(i int)', i) FROM
> generate_series(1,)i;
Hm, I tried this case and didn't really detect much runtime difference
between v12 and HEAD.
> I don't know if it's any issue, but I
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 08:53:46PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Hmm, I wonder if you're comparing an assert-enabled pg13 build to a
> non-assert-enabled pg12 build, or something like that.
Great question - I thought of it myself but then forgot to look..
$ rpm -q postgresql1{2,3}-server
Hmm, I wonder if you're comparing an assert-enabled pg13 build to a
non-assert-enabled pg12 build, or something like that.
--
Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 5:39 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> - if (ts == update_ts)
> + if (ts >= update_ts)
Hi Dilip, I didn't follow this bit -- could you explain?
Here's a rebase. In the 0004 patch I chose to leave behind some
unnecessary braces to avoid
Michael Paquier writes:
> Applied on HEAD then. Thanks for the discussion!
Should we back-patch that? Usually I figure that people might want
to build back PG branches on newer platforms at some point, so that
it's useful to apply portability fixes across-the-board. On the
other hand, since
I can reproduce the issue with generated data:
pryzbyj=# SELECT format('create table t%s(i int)', i) FROM
generate_series(1,)i;
\set ECHO errors
\set QUIET
\gexec
$ time pg_dump --section=pre-data -d pryzbyj -h /tmp -p 5613 |wc
110015 240049 1577087
real0m50.445s
$ time pg_dump
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 02:35:28PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Okay, thanks for confirming. Let's do so then, I'll just wait a bit
> to see if there are more comments from others.
Applied on HEAD then. Thanks for the discussion!
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 10:37:08PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I have been able to work more on this patch today, and finally added
> an error context for the transaction block check, as that's cleaner.
> In my manual tests, I have also bumped into a case that failed with
> the original patch
From: Robert Haas
> I think it would be better to have read-write and read-only check
> trnasaction_read_only, and primary and standby can check the new
> thing. There can never be any real advantage in having synonyms for
> the same thing, but there can be an advantage to letting users choose
>
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 06:54:41AM -0400, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 8/13/20 1:22 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Joe, what's the version of libselinux used in rhinoceros? 2.5?
>
> rpm -q libselinux
> libselinux-2.5-15.el7.x86_64
Thanks!
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
On 2020-08-13 17:48:23 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I'm trying to narrow this down, but I'd be very happy for suggestions.
Would be worth knowing how much of the time pgbench is 100% CPU
utilized, and how much of the time it is basically waiting for server
side queries and largely idle.
If
On 2020-Aug-13, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I'm trying to narrow this down, but I'd be very happy for suggestions.
Maybe you can time "pg_dump --binary-upgrade" to see if the slowness
comes from there.
--
Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7
I ran into this while running pg_upgrade from beta2 to beta3:
$ time sudo -u postgres sh -c 'cd /var/lib/pgsql; /usr/pgsql-13/bin/pg_upgrade
-b /usr/pgsql-13b2/bin/ -d ./13b2/data -D ./13/data --link'
real94m18.335s
This instances has many table partitions, and the production
On 2020-Aug-13, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
> Cool.
> This version looks much simpler than mine and passes the tests fine.
Thanks, pushed it to all branches. Thanks for diagnosing this problem!
--
Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 07:25:54AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> so 25. 7. 2020 v 15:26 odesílatel vignesh C napsal:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 12:03 PM Pavel Stehule
> > wrote:
> > >> I meant can this:
> > >> printf(_(" --filter=FILENAMEread object name filter
> > >>
Greetings,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:30 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
> > So, in our world, wouldn't this translate to 'make cfbot complain'?
>
> This seems like it would be useful, but we'd have to figure out what
> to do about typedefs.list. If the
Hi,
On 2020-08-13 12:50:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > So, in our world, wouldn't this translate to 'make cfbot complain'?
>
> > I'm definitely a fan of the idea of having cfbot flag these and then we
> > maybe get to a point where it's not the committers dealing with
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 3:47 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> The traditional reason for not doing pgindent too often has been that
> it'd cause more work for people who have to rebase their patches over
> pgindent's results. If we want to do it more often, then in order to
> respond to that concern, I
On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 8:08 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> So, we can know whether server is primary/standby by checking
> in_recovery, as opposed to knowing whether read-write which is done by
> checking transaction_read_only. So we can keep read-write as a synonym
> for "primary", and check
Robert Haas writes:
> I am not sure whether weekly or after-every-commit pgindent runs is a
> good idea, but I think we should try to do it once a month or so. It's
> too annoying otherwise. I could go either way on the question of
> automation.
The traditional reason for not doing pgindent too
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:30 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
> So, in our world, wouldn't this translate to 'make cfbot complain'?
This seems like it would be useful, but we'd have to figure out what
to do about typedefs.list. If the patch is indented with the current
one (which is auto-generated by
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 7:47 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm not in favor of unsupervised pgindent runs, really. It can do a lot
> of damage to code that was written without thinking about it --- in
> particular, it'll make a hash of comment blocks that were manually
> formatted and not protected with
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 3:52 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> This looks like a very good suggestion to me. I will do this change in
> the next version. Just wondering if we should be doing similar changes
> in other contrib modules (like pgrowlocks, pageinspect and
> pgstattuple) as well?
It seems
Konstantin Knizhnik writes:
> Or funccollid=0 doesn't mean that collations of function arguments do
> not affect function behavior?
No, it does not. As I said already, there is no way to tell from outside
a function whether it pays attention to collation or not. funccollid
is the collation to
On 13.08.2020 20:00, Tom Lane wrote:
Konstantin Knizhnik writes:
Right now jsonb functions are treated as non-shippable by postgres_fdw
and so predicates with them are not pushed down to foreign server:
Yeah, that's kind of annoying, but breaking the collation check
is not an acceptable
Konstantin Knizhnik writes:
> Right now jsonb functions are treated as non-shippable by postgres_fdw
> and so predicates with them are not pushed down to foreign server:
Yeah, that's kind of annoying, but breaking the collation check
is not an acceptable fix. And what you're proposing *does*
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 6:30 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> * Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote:
>
> > There are many solutions that do such things but that do it in the
> "github
> > workflow" way, which is they do change -> commit -> create pull request,
> > and then somebody eyeballs
Stephen Frost writes:
> So, in our world, wouldn't this translate to 'make cfbot complain'?
> I'm definitely a fan of the idea of having cfbot flag these and then we
> maybe get to a point where it's not the committers dealing with fixing
> patches that weren't pgindent'd properly, it's the
I wrote:
> Hmmm ... maybe that should be more like
> if (smartShutState != SMART_NORMAL_USAGE &&
> backend_type == BACKEND_TYPE_NORMAL)
After some more rethinking and testing, here's a v5 that feels
fairly final to me. I realized that the logic in canAcceptConnections
was
Greetings,
* Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote:
> There's another option here as well, that is a bit "softer", is to use a
> pre-commit hook.
Yeah, +1 on a pre-commit idea to help address this. I certainly agree
with Andres that it's quite annoying to deal with commits coming in that
On 2020-Aug-13, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 05:35:14AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Next to the API definition I guess, is that dependency.h?
>
> We need something more central, see also MAX_PGATTRIBUTE_INSERT_BYTES
> and MAX_PGSHDEPEND_INSERT_BYTES. And the definition
Hi hackers,
Right now jsonb functions are treated as non-shippable by postgres_fdw
and so predicates with them are not pushed down to foreign server:
create table jt(content jsonb);
create extension postgres_fdw;
create server pg_fdw FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER postgres_fdw options(host
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:04 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 2:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> ..
> > > This patch's functionality can be independently verified by SQL APIs
> >
> > Your changes look fine to me.
> >
>
>
On 8/13/20 1:22 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 10:50:21PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Ummm ... aren't you going to get some cast-away-const warnings now?
>> Or are all of the called functions declared as taking "const char *"
>> not just "char *"?
>
> Let me see.. The
On 12.08.2020 22:58, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On 2020-Aug-12, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
'anyvisible' mode is not required AFAICS; reading the code, I think this
could also hit REINDEX CONCURRENTLY and CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, which
do not use that flag. I didn't try to reproduce it there, though.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 05:35:14AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Next to the API definition I guess, is that dependency.h?
We need something more central, see also MAX_PGATTRIBUTE_INSERT_BYTES
and MAX_PGSHDEPEND_INSERT_BYTES. And the definition should be named
something like
Hi hackers,
PGRES_FATAL_ERROR is the result status in most cases in the client-side when
the backend process raises an error. When the query is failed to execute,
PGRES_FATAL_ERROR is returned.
But in another case, PGRES_FATAL_ERROR is also returned. The situation is that
the network is broken
On 2020-Aug-13, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Okay. Would src/include/catalog/catalog.h be a suited location for
> this flag or somebody has a better idea?
Next to the API definition I guess, is that dependency.h?
--
Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL
Hi Asim,
Thanks for having a look into the patch and for sharing your feedback.
Please find my comments inline below:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:36 PM Asim Praveen wrote:
>
> Hi Ashutosh
>
> I stumbled upon this thread today, went through your patch and it looks good.
> A minor suggestion in
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 6:08 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch writes:
> > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 07:47:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> If the workflow is commit first and re-indent later, then we can always
> >> revert the pgindent commit and clean things up manually; but an auto
> >>
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:51 PM Pierre Giraud wrote:
>
> Le 07/08/2020 à 14:52, Julien Rouhaud a écrit :
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:30 PM Pierre Giraud
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> As far as I understand, in the upcoming version 13, information about
> >> buffers used
Hi Ashutosh
I stumbled upon this thread today, went through your patch and it looks good.
A minor suggestion in sanity_check_relation():
if (rel->rd_rel->relam != HEAP_TABLE_AM_OID)
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:47 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 02:58:44PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 3:47 AM Tomas Vondra
> >> Any luck trying to reproduce thigs? Should I try again and collect some
> >> additional debug info?
> >
> >No luck. I'm working
52 matches
Mail list logo
