Thanks for raising this.
On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 at 12:59, Noah Misch wrote:
> This (commit 77bae39) did not change function parameter counts, and
> TUPLESORT_RANDOMACCESS generally has same the same numeric value as "true". I
> get no warning if I pass "true" for the "sortopt" flags parameter.
On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 at 13:44, Tom Lane wrote:
> There is zero security concern for non-SECURITY-DEFINER functions,
> since they do nothing callers couldn't do for themselves. For those,
> you typically do want to grant out permissions. As for SECURITY DEFINER
> functions, there is no reason
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 5:59 PM Noah Misch wrote:
> This (commit 77bae39) did not change function parameter counts, and
> TUPLESORT_RANDOMACCESS generally has same the same numeric value as "true". I
> get no warning if I pass "true" for the "sortopt" flags parameter. Hence, I
> suspect this
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:00:08PM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> 0002:
> This modifies the tuplesort API so that instead of having a
> randomAccess bool flag, this is changed to a bitwise flag that we can
> add further options in the future. It's slightly annoying to break
> the API, but it's not
> On 22 Apr 2022, at 19:01, Tom Lane wrote:
> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> Consuming all (both) errors and creating a concatenated string seems overkill
>> as it would alter the API from a const error string to something that needs
>> freeing etc (also, very few OpenSSL consumers actually drain
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 9:49 AM Matthias van de Meent
wrote:
> Regardless of my (lack of) opinion on the inclusion of this patch in
> PG (I did not significantly review this patch); I noticed that you do
> not yet identify the 'fork' of the FPI in the file name.
>
> A lack of fork identifier in
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> As I said earlier, I think semantically/mathematically, the changes
> proposed by this patch set are okay.
I took a quick look at this patch because I wondered how it would
affect the SEARCH/CYCLE bug discussed at [1]. Doesn't it break
rewriteSearchAndCycle()
On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 at 00:51, David Christensen
wrote:
>
> Hi -hackers,
>
> Enclosed is a patch to allow extraction/saving of FPI from the WAL
> stream via pg_waldump.
>
> Description from the commit:
>
> Extracts full-page images from the WAL stream into a target directory,
> which must be empty
On 2022-Apr-22, David Christensen wrote:
> Hi -hackers,
>
> Enclosed is a patch to allow extraction/saving of FPI from the WAL
> stream via pg_waldump.
I already wrote and posted a patch to do exactly this, and found it the
only way to fix a customer problem, so +1 on having this feature. I
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:56 PM Amul Sul wrote:
> >
> > It is a very minor change, so I rebased the patch. Please take a look, if
> > that works for you.
> >
>
> Thanks, I am getting one more failure for the vacuumlazy.c. on the
> latest master head(d75288fb27b), I fixed that in attached
On Friday, April 22, 2022, Jian He wrote:
> select arraymultirange(arrayrange(array[1,2], array[2,1]));
>
> ERROR: 42883: function arrayrange(integer[], integer[]) does not exist
>> LINE 1: select arraymultirange(arrayrange(array[1,2], array[2,1]));
>>^
>> HINT:
I'm trying to figure out how to get this feature more attention. Everyone
agrees it would be a huge help but it's a scary patch to review.
I wonder if it would be helpful to have a kind of "readers guide"
explanation of the patches to help a reviewer understand what the point of
each patch is and
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 2:11 PM Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
>
> We have faced with the similar problem in Zenith (open source Aurora)
> and have to implement back pressure mechanism to prevent overflow of WAL
> at stateless compute nodes
> and too long delays of [age reconstruction. Our
select arraymultirange(arrayrange(array[1,2], array[2,1]));
ERROR: 42883: function arrayrange(integer[], integer[]) does not exist
> LINE 1: select arraymultirange(arrayrange(array[1,2], array[2,1]));
>^
> HINT: No function matches the given name and argument
14 matches
Mail list logo
