> Why can't we call ReorderBufferCleanupTXN() from
> ReorderBufferFinishPrepared after your changes?
>
Since the truncate already removed the changes, it would fail on the
below Assert in ReorderBufferCleanupTXN()
/* Check we're not mixing changes from different transactions. */
As
On 2020-09-21 05:48, Amit Kapila wrote:
What according to you should be the behavior here and how will it be
better than current?
I think if I write VACUUM (PARALLEL 5), it should use up to 5 workers
(up to the number of indexes), even if max_parallel_maintenance_workers
is 2.
--
Peter Eise
On 21/09/2020 02:06, Tom Lane wrote:
Justin Pryzby writes:
This also appears to break checksums.
Thanks, I'll go fix it.
I was wondering about that, because the typical pattern for use of
smgrextend for indexes seems to be
RelationOpenSmgr(rel);
PageSetChecksumInplace(page,
On 21/09/2020 11:08, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I think they need to, so that they can stamp the page with the LSN of
the WAL record. But GiST build is special in that regard, because it
stamps all pages with GistBuildLSN.
Actually, don't we have a problem with that, even before this patch?
Eve
Re: Namrata Bhave
> As seen from downloads page, the Apt repo/rpms are not yet available for
> s390x for latest versions.
Hi,
are you asking about apt (.deb) or yum (.rpm) packages?
> Wanted to know if there is any work going on/planned to provide Postgres in
> ready-to-use package or installer
> 21 сент. 2020 г., в 13:45, Heikki Linnakangas написал(а):
>
> On 21/09/2020 11:08, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> I think they need to, so that they can stamp the page with the LSN of
>> the WAL record. But GiST build is special in that regard, because it
>> stamps all pages with GistBuildLSN.
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 2:21 PM Nikolay Shaplov wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I am still working with reloptions patches, and noticed that in current master
> deduplicate_items option exists, but never actually used.
> You can set, it, you can dump it, it has proper representation in BTOptions,
> it is
Hi All,
Today, while exploring logical replication in PostgreSQL, I noticed
that logical replication from PG version 13 and below to PG v14
(development version) is not working. It has stopped working from the
following git commit onwards:
commit 464824323e57dc4b397e8b05854d779908b55304
Author: A
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 12:36 PM Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> > Why can't we call ReorderBufferCleanupTXN() from
> > ReorderBufferFinishPrepared after your changes?
> >
>
> Since the truncate already removed the changes, it would fail on the
> below Assert in ReorderBufferCleanupTXN()
> /* Chec
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 10:20 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 11:01 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 6:02 PM Ajin Cherian wrote:
> > >
> >
> > 3.
> >
> > + /*
> > + * If it's ROLLBACK PREPARED then handle it via callbacks.
> > + */
> > + if (TransactionIdIs
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 3:31 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> + /*
> + * If it's ROLLBACK PREPARED then handle it via callbacks.
> + */
> + if (TransactionIdIsValid(xid) &&
> + !SnapBuildXactNeedsSkip(ctx->snapshot_builder, buf->origptr) &&
> + parsed->dbId == ctx->slot->data.database &&
> + !FilterByOrig
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 12:45 PM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
>
> On 2020-09-21 05:48, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > What according to you should be the behavior here and how will it be
> > better than current?
>
> I think if I write VACUUM (PARALLEL 5), it should use up to 5 workers
> (up to the number of in
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:26 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> commit 464824323e57dc4b397e8b05854d779908b55304
> Author: Amit Kapila
> Date: Thu Sep 3 07:54:07 2020 +0530
>
> Above select query produces no result. When this experiment is
> performed below the mentioned git commit, it works fine.
>
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:26 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Today, while exploring logical replication in PostgreSQL, I noticed
> that logical replication from PG version 13 and below to PG v14
> (development version) is not working. It has stopped working from the
> following git commi
This patch currently looks very ready for use. And I'm taking a close
look at the error reporting. Here we have difference in behavior of
local and foreign table:
regression test in postgres_fdw.sql:
copy rem2 from stdin;
-1 xyzzy
\.
reports error (1):
=
ERROR: new row fo
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:45 PM Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 3:31 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> > + /*
> > + * If it's ROLLBACK PREPARED then handle it via callbacks.
> > + */
> > + if (TransactionIdIsValid(xid) &&
> > + !SnapBuildXactNeedsSkip(ctx->snapshot_builder, buf->origptr)
> On 11 Sep 2020, at 14:39, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> For example, if I have a service file with gssencmode=disable set, that
> service file cannot be used by a psql client linked against libpq from
> version 10. Even if the behavior would be identical (since v10 doesn't have
> gssencmode).
>
Em dom., 20 de set. de 2020 às 21:10, Tomas Vondra <
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> escreveu:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 08:09:56PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >Em sex., 18 de set. de 2020 às 10:37, Tomas Vondra <
> >tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> escreveu:
> >
> >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 06:31:12
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 9:24 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> I think we need to call ReorderBufferAbort at least to clean up the
> TXN. Also, if what you are saying is correct then that should be true
> without this patch as well, no? If so, we don't need to worry about it
> as far as this patch is conce
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 9:14 AM Wang, Shenhao
wrote:
>
> In source, I find that the postmaster will first load library, and then
> calculate the value of MaxBackends.
>
> In the old version, the MaxBackends was calculated by:
> MaxBackends = MaxConnections + autovacuum_max_workers + 1 +
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 5:23 PM Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 9:24 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > I think we need to call ReorderBufferAbort at least to clean up the
> > TXN. Also, if what you are saying is correct then that should be true
> > without this patch as well, no? If so,
The pg_service.conf parsing thread [0] made me realize that we have a hardwired
line length of max 256 bytes. Lifting this would be in line with recent work
for ecpg, pg_regress and pg_hba (784b1ba1a2 and 8f8154a50). The attached moves
pg_service.conf to use the new pg_get_line_append API and a S
On 21/09/2020 02:06, Tom Lane wrote:
Justin Pryzby writes:
This also appears to break checksums.
Fixed, thanks for the report!
I was wondering about that, because the typical pattern for use of
smgrextend for indexes seems to be
RelationOpenSmgr(rel);
PageSetChecksumInplace
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 4:15 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:26 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Today, while exploring logical replication in PostgreSQL, I noticed
> > that logical replication from PG version 13 and below to PG v14
> > (development version) i
On 21/09/2020 12:06, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
21 сент. 2020 г., в 13:45, Heikki Linnakangas
написал(а):
Actually, don't we have a problem with that, even before this
patch? Even though we set the LSN to the magic GistBuildLSN value
when we build the index, WAL replay will write the LSN of the
r
Alvaro,
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 17:26, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2020-Aug-31, Matthieu Garrigues wrote:
>
> > It seems like this patch is nearly finished. I fixed all the remaining
> > issues. I'm also asking a confirmation of the test scenarios you want
> > to see in the next version of the pat
Thanks Dilip for the patch. AFAIU, the fix looks good. One small comment:
In the error message we are still referring to the native protocol
version number. Shouldn't it be replaced with the greatest protocol
version number we support now (i.e. LOGICALREP_PROTO_MAX_VERSION_NUM)?
- if (data-
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 9:11 AM Andy Fan wrote:
>
> Here are some changes for my detection program.
>
> | | seq_read_lat (us) |
> random_read_lat (us) |
> | FIO |12 |
>14
Dave Cramer
www.postgres.rocks
On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 11:46, Matthieu Garrigues <
matthieu.garrig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems like this patch is nearly finished. I fixed all the remaining
> issues. I'm also asking
> a confirmation of the test scenarios you want to see in the next
> v
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:27 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Thanks Dilip for the patch. AFAIU, the fix looks good. One small comment:
>
> In the error message we are still referring to the native protocol
> version number. Shouldn't it be replaced with the greatest protocol
> version number we supp
On 2020-Sep-21, Dave Cramer wrote:
Hello Dave,
> I am looking for this in the commitfest and can't find it. However there is
> an old commitfest entry
>
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/13/1024/
>
> Do you have the link for the new one ?
Here you go:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/29/27
Matthieu Garrigues
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:09 PM Dave Cramer wrote:
>>
> There was a comment upthread a while back that people should look at the
> comments made in
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180322.211148.187821341.horiguchi.kyotaro%40lab.ntt.co.jp
> by Horiguchi-San.
>
> Fro
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:27 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Thanks Dilip for the patch. AFAIU, the fix looks good. One small comment:
>
Thanks Ashutosh and Dilip for working on this. I'll look into it in a
day or two.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
> 21 сент. 2020 г., в 17:15, Heikki Linnakangas написал(а):
>
> On 21/09/2020 12:06, Andrey M. Borodin wrote
>>
>> I think we don't set rightlinks during index build.
>
> The new GiST sorting code does not, but the regular insert-based code does.
>
> That's a bit questionable in the new cod
On 2020-Sep-18, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> This thread from 2015 is the most comprehensive discussion I remember of
> Japanese name ordering, including a suggestion to use small caps:
>
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20150613231826.GY133018%40postgresql.org#88d245a5cdd2b32e1e3e
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 09:21, Matthieu Garrigues <
matthieu.garrig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Matthieu Garrigues
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:09 PM Dave Cramer
> wrote:
> >>
> > There was a comment upthread a while back that people should look at the
> comments made in
> https://www.postgresql.org/m
On 2020-Sep-18, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Based on the low level of activity and the fact that the patch was
> marked as waiting on author for a couple of weeks, it looks like
> little could be achieved by the end of the CF, and the attention was
> elsewhere, so it looked better (and it still does
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:39 PM Dave Cramer wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 09:21, Matthieu Garrigues
> wrote:
>>
>> Matthieu Garrigues
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:09 PM Dave Cramer
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> > There was a comment upthread a while back that people should look at the
>> > co
> 21 сент. 2020 г., в 18:29, Andrey M. Borodin
> написал(а):
>
> It was a conscious decision with incorrect motivation. I was thinking that it
> will help to reduce number of "false positive" inspecting right pages. But
> now I see that:
> 1. There should be no such "false positives" that we
Hi Christoph,
Thank you for your response.
We will be glad to obtain binaries for s390x on RHEL, SLES and Ubuntu
distros.
We are ready to provide the necessary infra. To enable this, we would need
more information about VM configuration(No of VMs, OS, vCPUs, memory,
Storage). Secondly T &C's wo
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 21/09/2020 02:06, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Another interesting point is that all the other index AMs seem to WAL-log
>> the new page before the smgrextend call, whereas this code is doing it
>> in the other order. I strongly doubt that both patterns are equally
>> correc
On 2020-09-18 00:54, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 01:36:16PM +0300, Alexey Kondratov wrote:
Thank you for the link!
After a quick look on the Sawada-san's patch set I think that there
are two
major differences:
1. There is a built-in foreign xacts resolver in the [1], which s
Amit Kapila writes:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 10:43 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> AFAICS, there is no chance of the existing pg_surgery regression test
>> being fully stable if we don't fix both things.
> What if ensure that it runs with autovacuum = off and there is no
> parallel test running? I am not
If there's a better list than this, please let me know, but I figured
hackers is appropriate since the extension building infrastructure is
documented in core.
While working on an in-house extension I realized that while PGXS
provides the standard regression test infrastructure, I'm not aware of
a
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
> The pg_service.conf parsing thread [0] made me realize that we have a
> hardwired
> line length of max 256 bytes. Lifting this would be in line with recent work
> for ecpg, pg_regress and pg_hba (784b1ba1a2 and 8f8154a50). The attached
> moves
> pg_service.conf to u
James Coleman writes:
> If there's a better list than this, please let me know, but I figured
> hackers is appropriate since the extension building infrastructure is
> documented in core.
> While working on an in-house extension I realized that while PGXS
> provides the standard regression test i
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 11:36 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> James Coleman writes:
> > If there's a better list than this, please let me know, but I figured
> > hackers is appropriate since the extension building infrastructure is
> > documented in core.
>
> > While working on an in-house extension I rea
James Coleman writes:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 11:36 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> The recommended way to deal with updates these days is to leave the
>> original extension script as-is and just write update scripts
>> (1.0--1.1, 1.1--1.2, etc). That way, application of the updates
>> is tested automat
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 08:32:35AM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
Em dom., 20 de set. de 2020 às 21:10, Tomas Vondra <
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> escreveu:
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 08:09:56PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>Em sex., 18 de set. de 2020 às 10:37, Tomas Vondra <
>tomas.von...@2ndquadr
Justin Pryzby writes:
> Thanks. Here's the remainder, with some new ones.
LGTM. I tweaked one or two places a bit more, and pushed it.
regards, tom lane
Em seg., 21 de set. de 2020 às 13:37, Tomas Vondra <
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> escreveu:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 08:32:35AM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >Em dom., 20 de set. de 2020 às 21:10, Tomas Vondra <
> >tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> escreveu:
> >
> >> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 08:09:56
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 01:50:34PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
Em seg., 21 de set. de 2020 às 13:37, Tomas Vondra <
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> escreveu:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 08:32:35AM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>Em dom., 20 de set. de 2020 às 21:10, Tomas Vondra <
>tomas.von...@2ndquadr
Hi Dave,
I merged PQbatchProcessQueue into PQgetResult.
One first init call to PQbatchProcessQueue was also required in
PQsendQueue to have
PQgetResult ready to read the first batch query.
Tests and documentation are updated accordingly.
Matthieu Garrigues
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:39 PM Dave Cr
Em seg., 21 de set. de 2020 às 14:24, Tomas Vondra <
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> escreveu:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 01:50:34PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >Em seg., 21 de set. de 2020 às 13:37, Tomas Vondra <
> >tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> escreveu:
> >
> >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 08:32:35
On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 6:27 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> But maybe we could still use this scheme by actually computing
>
> h1 = hash_uint32_extended(value, seed1);
> h2 = hash_uint32_extended(value, seed2);
>
> and then use this as the independent hash functions. I think that would
> meet t
I wrote:
> We still have to deal with
> src/backend/utils/sort/qsort_tuple.c
> src/pl/plpgsql/src/plerrcodes.h
> src/pl/plpython/spiexceptions.h
> src/pl/tcl/pltclerrcodes.h
> if we want to be entirely clean about this.
I took care of those, so I think we're done here.
reg
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 1:13 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> 1. My patch a7212be8b does indeed have a problem. It will allow
> vacuum_set_xid_limits to compute freezeLimit = nextXid for a temp
> table if freeze_min_age is zero (ie VACUUM FREEZE). If there's
> any concurrent transactions, this falls foul of
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 9:17 PM Hou, Zhijie wrote:
> In (/contrib/bloom/blutils.c:277), I found it use DatumGetInt32 to get UInt32
> type.
> Is it more appropriate to use DatumGetUInt32 here?
Typically, the DatumGetBlah() function that you pick should match the
SQL data type that the function is
> On 21 Sep 2020, at 19:59, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I wrote:
>> We still have to deal with
>> src/backend/utils/sort/qsort_tuple.c
>> src/pl/plpgsql/src/plerrcodes.h
>> src/pl/plpython/spiexceptions.h
>> src/pl/tcl/pltclerrcodes.h
>> if we want to be entirely clean about this.
>
> I took care of tho
> On 19 Sep 2020, at 04:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 04:11:13PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> The other problem was that the cipher context
>> padding must be explicitly set, whereas in previous versions relying on the
>> default worked fine. EVP_CIPHER_CTX_set_paddi
Robert Haas writes:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 1:13 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> 2. As Amit suspected, there's an inconsistency between pruneheap.c's
>> rules for which tuples are removable and vacuum.c's rules for that.
>> This seems like a massive bug in its own right: what's the point of
>> pruneheap.
Robert Haas writes:
> Typically, the DatumGetBlah() function that you pick should match the
> SQL data type that the function is returning. So if the function
> returns pg_catalog.int4, which corresponds to the C data type int32,
> you would use DatumGetInt32. There is no SQL type corresponding to
Oh wait, I forgot about the fmgrprotos.h discrepancy.
I wrote:
> It strikes me that a low-cost workaround would be to rename these
> C functions. There's no law that their C names must match the
> SQL names.
Here's a proposed patch to fix it that way.
regards, tom lane
On 2020-Sep-21, Tom Lane wrote:
> Oh wait, I forgot about the fmgrprotos.h discrepancy.
>
> I wrote:
> > It strikes me that a low-cost workaround would be to rename these
> > C functions. There's no law that their C names must match the
> > SQL names.
>
> Here's a proposed patch to fix it that
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> On 2020-Sep-21, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Here's a proposed patch to fix it that way.
> pgtypes_numeric.h still contains
> typedef struct
> {
> } numeric;
> ... isn't this more likely to create a typedef entry than merely a
> function name?
Well, yeah, it *is* a typedef. My p
On 2020-Sep-21, Tom Lane wrote:
> > ... isn't this more likely to create a typedef entry than merely a
> > function name?
>
> Well, yeah, it *is* a typedef. My proposal is to rename the C function
> to avoid the conflict, rather than renaming the typedef. Given the
> small number of direct call
Hi,
On 2020-09-21 14:08:22 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> There is no SQL type corresponding to the C data type uint32, so I'm
> not sure why we even have DatumGetUInt32. I'm sort of suspicious that
> there's some fuzzy thinking going on there.
I think we mostly use it for the few places where we c
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 01:42:34PM -0400, John Naylor wrote:
On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 6:27 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
But maybe we could still use this scheme by actually computing
h1 = hash_uint32_extended(value, seed1);
h2 = hash_uint32_extended(value, seed2);
and then use this as the i
Hi,
On 2020-09-18 17:55:12 +0900, btnakamichin wrote:
> I’m thinking of adding adding a function called
> pg_stat_statements_reset_time() that returns the last timestamp when
> executed pg_stat_statements_reset(). pg_stat_statements can reset each SQL
> statement. We can record each sql reset timi
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 2:21 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Right, but what we end up with is that the very same tuple xmin and
> xmax might result in pruning/deletion, or not, depending on whether
> it's part of a HOT chain or not. That's at best pretty weird, and
> at worst it means that corner-case bugs
Hi,
On 2020-09-21 16:02:29 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 2:21 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > Right, but what we end up with is that the very same tuple xmin and
> > xmax might result in pruning/deletion, or not, depending on whether
> > it's part of a HOT chain or not. That's at be
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 2:21 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Right, but what we end up with is that the very same tuple xmin and
>> xmax might result in pruning/deletion, or not, depending on whether
>> it's part of a HOT chain or not. That's at best pretty weird, and
>> at worst it
Hi,
On 2020-09-20 13:13:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> 2. As Amit suspected, there's an inconsistency between pruneheap.c's
> rules for which tuples are removable and vacuum.c's rules for that.
> This seems like a massive bug in its own right: what's the point of
> pruneheap.c going to huge effort to
Andres Freund writes:
> The reason for that is that the GlobalVisState stuff is computed
> heuristically (and then re-checked if that's not sufficient to prune a
> tuple, unless already done so). That's done so GetSnapshotData() doesn't
> have to look at each backends ->xmin, which is quite a mass
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:23 PM Thomas Munro
wrote:
>
> While thinking about looping hash joins (an alternative strategy for
> limiting hash join memory usage currently being investigated by
> Melanie Plageman in a nearby thread[1]), the topic of parallel query
> deadlock hazards came back to ha
Hi,
On 2020-09-21 16:40:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> >> I think to move forward, we need to figure out what the freezing
> >> behavior ought to be for temp tables. We could make it the same
> >> as it was before a7212be8b, which'd just require some more complexity
> >> in
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2020-09-21 16:40:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andres Freund writes:
>>> I think that's an argument for what I suggested elsewhere, which is that
>>> we should move the logic for a different horizon for temp tables out of
>>> vacuum_set_xid_limits, and into procarray.
>
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 2:19 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> While scanning for comments and identifier names that needed updating,
> I realised that this patch changed the behaviour of the ShutdownXXX()
> functions, since they currently flush the SLRUs but are not followed
> by a checkpoint. I'm not en
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 10:36 AM Mark Dilger
wrote:
> Thanks for the review!
+ msg OUT text
+ )
Looks like atypical formatting.
+REVOKE ALL ON FUNCTION
+verify_heapam(regclass, boolea
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 9:41 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> "A couple of weeks" of inactivity is not sufficient, in my view, to boot
> a patch out of the commitfest process. Whenever the patch is
> resurrected, it will be a new entry which won't have the history that it
> had accumulated in the long
On 2020-09-21 17:03:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2020-09-21 16:40:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Andres Freund writes:
> >>> I think that's an argument for what I suggested elsewhere, which is that
> >>> we should move the logic for a different horizon for temp tables
Pavel Stehule writes:
> I see few possibilities how to finish and close this issue:
> 1. use anycompatible type and add note to documentation so expression of
> optional argument can change a result type, and so this is Postgres
> specific - other databases and ANSI SQL disallow this.
> It is the
Hi Andrey-san, all,
From: Andrey V. Lepikhov
> On 7/27/20 11:22 AM, tsunakawa.ta...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > Could you take a look at this patent? I'm afraid this is the Clock-SI for
> > MVCC.
> Microsoft holds this until 2031. I couldn't find this with the keyword
> "Clock-SI.""
> >
> >
> > US8
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 7:09 AM Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here is a new version that hopefully address most of the concerns
> mentioned in this thread so far. As before, first two patches are taken
> from UniqueKeys thread and attached only for the reference. List of
> changes
From: Masahiko Sawada
> Yes, but it still seems hard to me that we require for all FDW
> implementations to commit/rollback prepared transactions without the
> possibility of ERROR.
Of course we can't eliminate the possibility of error, because remote servers
require network communication. What
Hi Hackers.
I have a test table with multiple (10) columns defined as TIME WITHOUT
TIME ZONE.
When loading this table with a lot of data (e.g. "COPY tbl FROM
/my/path/2GB.csv WITH (FORMAT CSV)") I observed it was spending an
excessive amount of time within the function GetCurrentDateTime.
IIUC t
Peter Smith writes:
> IIUC the code is calling GetCurrentDateTime only to acquire the
> current TX timestamp as a struct pg_tm in order to derive some
> timezone information.
> ...
> I have attached a patch which caches this struct, so now those 225
> million calls are reduced to just 1 call.
Int
I wrote:
> Interesting idea, but this implementation is leaving a *lot*
> on the table. If we want to cache the result of
> timestamp2tm applied to GetCurrentTransactionStartTimestamp(),
> there are half a dozen different call sites that could make
> use of such a cache, eg, GetSQLCurrentDate and
Hi,
On 2020-09-08 17:55:57 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Locks on the shared statistics is acquired by the units of such like
> tables, functions so the expected chance of collision are not so high.
I can't really parse that...
> Furthermore, until 1 second has elapsed since the last flushi
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:58 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:27 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Dilip for the patch. AFAIU, the fix looks good. One small comment:
> >
>
> Thanks Ashutosh and Dilip for working on this. I'll look into it in a
> day or two.
>
Just a tho
Hi Tom.
Thanks for your feedback.
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:44 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Still, for the size of the patch I'm envisioning, it'd be well
> worth the trouble.
The OP patch I gave was just a POC to test the effect and to see if
the idea was judged as worthwhile...
I will rewrite/fix
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 5:59 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> That's all I have for now.
One more thing. I don't think that this should be a bitwise AND:
if ((offnum > maxoff) & (so->currPos.nextPage == P_NONE))
{
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:49 AM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:23 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
>> 1. You could probably make it so that the PHJ_BATCH_SCAN_INNER phase
>> in this patch (the scan for unmatched tuples) is executed by only one
>> process, using the "detach-and-see-if
Hi Hackers,
Following on from Dilip Kumar's POC patch for allowing parallelism of
the SELECT part of "INSERT INTO ... SELECT ...", I have attached a POC
patch for allowing parallelism of both the INSERT and SELECT parts,
where it can be allowed.
For cases where it can't be allowed (e.g. INSERT int
Hi hackers
In(/src/bin/scripts/reindexdb.c; /src/backend/access/rmgrdesc/dbasedesc.c;
/src/pl/plpython/plpy_elog.c)
I found some more places that should use appendPQExrBufferStr instead of
appendPQExpBuffer.
Here is the patch.
Previous Discussion:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKJS1f
Thanks Ashutosh for coming:)
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 9:03 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 9:11 AM Andy Fan wrote:
> >
> > Here are some changes for my detection program.
> >
> > | | seq_read_lat (us) |
> random_read_lat (us) |
>
>
>
> It's probably worth testing on various other storage systems to see
>> how that applies to those.
>>
>> Yes, I can test more on new hardware once I get it. Now it is still in
> progress.
> However I can only get a physical machine with SSD or Virtual machine with
> SSD, other types are hard
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:34 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:58 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:27 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks Dilip for the patch. AFAIU, the fix looks good. One small comment:
> > >
> >
> > Thanks Ashutosh an
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:02 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:34 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:58 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:27 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Dilip for the patch. AFAIU,
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:22 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:02 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:34 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:58 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:27
100 matches
Mail list logo
