On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 9:18 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 08:24:53AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 6:02 AM Euler Taveira wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 12, 2022, at 11:22 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:12:54AM -0300,
On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 10:25 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> Japin, are you able to reproduce the problem reliably? Did I guess
> right, that you're on illumos? Does this help? I used
> defined(__sun__) to select the option, but I don't remember if that's
> the right way to detect that OS family,
Hi David:
> Does anyone have any thoughts about this JIT costing? Is this an
> improvement? Is there a better way?
>
>
I think this is an improvement. However I'm not sure how much improvement
& effort we want pay for it. I just shared my thoughts to start this
discussion.
1. Ideally there
On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 3:33 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> This seems fine, but I think you should add a non-trivial comment about it.
Thanks for looking. Done, and pushed. Let's see if 180s per query is enough...
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 04:09:00PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> As of what pgstat_create_function() does to create the stats of a new
> function in a transactional way, it looks like you are right. Will
> fix if there are no objections.
And done with fcab82a. Thanks, Amul.
--
Michael
Hi,
On 2022-05-11 12:18:58 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> This currently only works on macOS. The dtrace -G calls needed on
> other platforms are not implemented yet.
I looked into that part. The make rule passes all the backend object files as
an option, but it's not clear to me where / why
Hi,
w.r.t. v33-0001-Remove-self-joins.patch :
removes inner join of plane table -> removes inner join of plain table
in an query plan -> in a query plan
+ * Used as the relation_has_unique_index_for,
Since relation_has_unique_index_for() becomes a wrapper of
relation_has_unique_index_ext, the
On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 9:25 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> In short, I'd recommend -DWAIT_USE_POLL for now. It's possible that
> we could do something to prevent the selection of WAIT_USE_EPOLL on
> that platform, or that we should have a halfway option epoll() but not
> signalfd() (= go back to
On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 2:09 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 6:16 AM Japin Li wrote:
> > The process cannot be terminated by pg_terminate_backend(), although
> > it returns true.
> One thing I find a bit curious is that the top of the stack in your
> case is ioctl(). And there
On 2022-05-13 22:09, Andres Freund wrote:
What does
sysctl kern.timecounter
return? Does the problem continue if you switch kern.timecounter.hardware to
something else?
openbsd 5.9:
$ sysctl kern.timecounter
kern.timecounter.tick=1
kern.timecounter.timestepwarnings=0
We didn't have any use of TransactionId as members of List, until
RelationSyncEntry->streamed_txns was introduced (464824323e57, pg14).
It's currently implemented as a list of int. This is not wrong at
present, but it may soon be, and I'm sure it rubs some people the wrong
way.
But is the
Hi,
On 2022-05-13 10:22:32 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-05-13 09:00:20 +0200, Mikael Kjellström wrote:
> > Well, I don't know if you remember but there was a thread a while back and a
> > test program (monotime.c) to test the clock if it could go backwards and
> > openbsd showed the
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 02:48:27PM +0200, Baca Radim wrote:
> Hi,
> we are developing an extension for multidimensional data. We have created a
> Gist index that is heavily inspired by a cube extension. Right now we would
> like to add some item compression since data items in a node share a
>
On Fri, May 13, 2022, at 3:36 AM, Antonin Houska wrote:
> Attached is my proposal. It tries to be more specific and does not mention the
> absence of the privileges explicitly.
You explained the current issue but say nothing about the limitation. This
information will trigger a question possibly
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 07:05:11PM +1000, Peter Smith wrote:
> This MMLR proposal was mostly just to create an interface making it
> easier to use PostgreSQL core logical replication CREATE
> PUBLICATION/SUBSCRIPTION for table sharing among a set of nodes.
> Otherwise, this is difficult for a user
Hi,
On 2022-05-13 09:00:20 +0200, Mikael Kjellström wrote:
> Well, I don't know if you remember but there was a thread a while back and a
> test program (monotime.c) to test the clock if it could go backwards and
> openbsd showed the following result when running the attached testprogram:
Nope,
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 8:47 AM Simon Riggs
wrote:
> > Note that I'm *not* against making checkpoint extensible - I just think it
> > needs a good bit of design work around when the hook is called etc.
>
> When was any such work done previously for any other hook?? That isn't needed.
I think
On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 12:48 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> The point of the ring/strategy buffer is to avoid a seq scan/vacuum/COPY
> clobbering the entire buffer cache when processing a table larger than
> shared_buffers.
>
> It also makes backends doing bulk operations responsible for their own
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 08:24:53AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 6:02 AM Euler Taveira wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 12, 2022, at 11:22 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:12:54AM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote:
> > OB> On Thu, May 12, 2022, at 11:03 AM,
On Fri, 2022-05-13 at 13:31 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> The first was a discussion about a data structure needed by BDR about
> 4 years ago. In the absence of a pluggable checkpoint, the solution
> was forced to use a normal table, which wasn't very satisfactory.
I'm interested to hear more about
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 10:48:41AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 10:52 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Okay, I went with:
> >
> > Previously, such updates ran delete actions on the source
> > partition and insert actions on the target partition. PostgreSQL
> >
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 09:49:54AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Committed.
Thanks!
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 10:20 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> As for skink failing, the timeout was hard coded 300s for the whole
> test, but apparently that wasn't enough under valgrind. Let's use the
> standard PostgreSQL::Test::Utils::timeout_default (180s usually), but
> reset it for each query we
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 01:36:04AM +, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> >
> > This is enabled with the subscriber option "disable_on_error"
> > and avoids possible infinite loops during stream application.
> >
> >
> Thank you !
>
> In this last paragraph, how about
On Friday, May 13, 2022 6:42 PM Wang, Wei/王 威 wrote:
> Attach the patches.(Only changed the patch for HEAD.).
> 1. Optimize the code. Reduce calls to function filter_partitions.
> [suggestions by
> Amit-san] 2. Improve the alias name in SQL. [suggestions by Amit-san] 3.
> Improve coding
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 6:16 AM Japin Li wrote:
> The process cannot be terminated by pg_terminate_backend(), although
> it returns true.
pg_terminate_backend() just sends SIGINT. What I'm wondering is what
happens when the stuck process receives SIGINT. It would be useful, I
think, to check the
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 8:15 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 06:51:59PM +0300, Anton A. Melnikov wrote:
> > Maybe remove the first part from the patchset?
> > Because now the Patch Tester is giving apply error for the first part and
> > can't test the other.
> >
> here is the rebased v32 version of the patch.
>
> The patchset rotted a bit. Here is a rebased version.
>
We have posted an updated version v34 of the whole patchset in [1].
Changes of patches 0001-0003 there are identical to v33. So, no update is
needed in this thread.
[1]
On Fri, 13 May 2022 at 19:41, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 06:16:23PM +0800, Japin Li wrote:
>> I had an incident on my Postgres 14 that queries hung in wait event
>> IPC / MessageQueueInternal, MessageQueueReceive. It likes [1],
>> however, it doesn't have any discussions.
>
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 5:11 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> Here's the rebased v9 patch.
This seems like it has enormous overlap with the existing
functionality that we have from log_startup_progress_interval.
I think that facility is also better-designed than this one. It prints
out a message
On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 2:07 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2022-May-05, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 4:11 PM Alvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Did we ever consider the idea of using a new pg_stat_wal_activity_progress
> > > view or something like that, using the
On Fri, 13 May 2022 at 00:42, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2022-05-12 22:26:51 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 May 2022 at 04:40, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > I'm not happy with the idea of random code being executed in the middle of
> > > CheckPointGuts(), without any documentation of
On Fri, May 06, 2022 at 09:50:26PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> It seems like that's not the case because postgres will not remove future WAL
> files even after max_wal_size is reduced,
In the past, I've had to generate synthetic write traffic and checkpoints to
get WAL to shrink. +1 to
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 7:37 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Julien Rouhaud writes:
> > On Mon, May 02, 2022 at 07:24:04PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> >> I basically want to avoid normal users/developers setting any
> >> parameter (especially the superuser-only log_min_message GUC, all
> >> users
On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 6:47 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 10:20 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Bharath Rupireddy writes:
> > > Can postgres delete the recycled future WAL files once max_wal_size is
> > > reduced and/or wal_recycle is set to off?
> >
> > A checkpoint should
On Fri, 13 May 2022 at 05:13, Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2022-05-12 at 22:26 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > I see multiple uses for the rm_checkpoint() point proposed and I've
> > been asked multiple times for a checkpoint hook.
>
> Can you elaborate and/or link to a discussion?
Those were
On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 5:55 PM Andrey Borodin wrote:
>
> > 10 мая 2022 г., в 12:59, Bharath Rupireddy
> > написал(а):
> >
> > If okay, I can make the GUC behave this way - value 0 existing
> > behaviour i.e. no wait for sync repl ack, just process query cancels
> > and proc die interrupts
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 06:16:23PM +0800, Japin Li wrote:
> I had an incident on my Postgres 14 that queries hung in wait event
> IPC / MessageQueueInternal, MessageQueueReceive. It likes [1],
> however, it doesn't have any discussions.
If the process is still running, or if the problem recurs,
Hi, hackers
I had an incident on my Postgres 14 that queries hung in wait event
IPC / MessageQueueInternal, MessageQueueReceive. It likes [1],
however, it doesn't have any discussions.
The process cannot be terminated by pg_terminate_backend(), although
it returns true.
Here is the call
On Fri, May 13, 2022 1:59 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 7:32 AM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > Attach the patches.(Only changed the patch for HEAD.).
> >
>
> Few comments:
> =
Thanks for your comments.
> 1.
> @@ -1135,6 +1172,15 @@
Hi Jonathan,
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 10:32 PM Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> On 5/12/22 7:26 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> > Attached is an updated patch. I'll commit the patch if no objections.
>
> I think this is much easier to read.
Cool!
> I made a few minor copy edits. Please see attached.
On Wednesday, May 11, 2022 1:10 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 9:35 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 5:59 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 10:39 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Having it optional seems a good
On Thursday, May 5, 2022 1:46 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are my review comments for v5-0001.
> I will take a look at the v5-0002 (TAP) patch another time.
Thanks for the comments !
> 4. Commit message
>
> User can set the streaming option to 'on/off', 'apply'. For now,
> 'apply' means the
Hi hackers,
> Here it the 2nd version of the patch:
>
> - Includes changes named above
> - Fixes a warning reported by cfbot
> - Fixes some FIXME's
> - The path includes some simple tests now
> - A proper commit message was added
Here is the rebased version of the patch. Changes compared to v2
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 10:22:57AM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> Sorry, hit the send button too early :|
- /* ensure that stats are dropped if transaction commits */
+ /* ensure that stats are dropped if transaction aborts */
if (!is_update)
pgstat_create_function(retval);
As of
On 2022-05-13 04:14, Andres Freund wrote:
One interesting tidbit is that the log timestamps are computed differently
(with elog.c:get_formatted_log_time()) than the reset timestamp (with
GetCurrentTimestamp()). Both use gettimeofday() internally.
I wonder if there's a chance that somehow
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 10.05.22 10:37, Antonin Houska wrote:
> > My understanding is that the rows/columns filtering is a way for the
> > *publisher* to control which data is available to particular replica. From
> > this point of view, the publication privileges would just make the
Euler Taveira wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2022, at 5:37 AM, Antonin Houska wrote:
>
> My understanding is that the rows/columns filtering is a way for the
> *publisher* to control which data is available to particular replica. From
> this point of view, the publication privileges would just
On Thursday, May 12, 2022 2:45 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 12:55 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wednesday, May 11, 2022 11:33 AM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Fair enough, then we should go with a simpler approach to detect it
> > > in pgoutput.c
49 matches
Mail list logo
