Hi
út 27. 12. 2022 v 6:26 odesílatel David Rowley
napsal:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 at 19:08, David Rowley
> wrote:
> > I'll submit it again when there more consensus that we want this.
>
> Waking up this old thread again. If you don't have a copy, the entire
> thread is in [1].
>
> The remaining i
Dear Peter,
> Anyway, this assertion is wrong, and simply needs to be removed.
> Thanks for the report
Thanks for modifying for quickly! I found your commit in the remote repository.
I will watch and report again if there are another issue.
Best Regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 11:16 AM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
> In case of logical replication, however, we cannot support the use-case that
> switches the role publisher <-> subscriber. Suppose same case as above,
> additional
> transactions are committed while doing step2. To catch up such c
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 10:57 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
> I guessed that this assertion failure seemed to be caused by the commit
> 4ce3af[2],
> because the Assert() seemed to be added by the commit.
I agree that the problem is with this assertion, which is on the
master branch (not in r
On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 2:02 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> I happened to notice $subject. It happens when we build eqfunctions for
> each grouping set.
>
> /* for each grouping set */
> for (int k = 0; k < phasedata->numsets; k++)
> {
> int length = phasedata->gset_leng
Hi hackers,
> On Thursday, December 22, 2022 3:02 PM Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> > Attached the updated patch.
> > Again, I used one basic patch in another thread to wake up logical
> > replication
> > worker shared in [2] for TAP tests.
> The v11 caused a cfbot failure in [1]. But, fai
Justin Pryzby writes:
> FYI: this causes meson test running ("installcheck") fail when run
> twice. I guess that's expected to work, per:
We do indeed expect that to work ... but I don't see any problem
with repeat "make installcheck" on HEAD. Can you provide more
detail about what you're seein
Dear Peter, Jeff,
While reviewing other patches, I found that cfbot raised ERROR during the
VACUUM FREEZE [1] on FreeBSD instance.
It seemed that same error has been occurred in other threads.
```
2022-12-23 08:50:20.175 UTC [34653][postmaster] LOG: server process (PID
37171) was terminated by
Pavel Stehule writes:
> I got new warning
> analyze.c: In function ‘transformStmt’:
> analyze.c:550:21: warning: ‘sub_rteperminfos’ may be used uninitialized
> [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
A couple of buildfarm animals are warning about that too ... but
only a couple.
regards,
On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 01:23:56PM +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> Pushed, thanks to everyone!
FYI: this causes meson test running ("installcheck") fail when run
twice. I guess that's expected to work, per:
b62303794efd97f2afb55f1e1b82fffae2cf8a2d
f3bbe81db0e84fb486c6423a234c47091b30
6928
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 11:42 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 9:33 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > BTW, the blocking problem with this patch is to deal with shutdown as
> > discussed in the thread [1].
>
> I will have a look.
>
Thanks!
> In short, the problem is that at
>
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 11:28 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 10:29 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 6:33 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > ---
> > > +if (!pa_can_start(xid))
> > > +return;
> > > +
> > > +/* Firs
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 2:24 PM John Naylor
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 12:14 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 8:47 PM John Naylor
> > wrote:
>
> > These 4 patches make sense to me.We can merge them into 0002 patch
>
> Okay, then I'll squash them when I post my
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 9:33 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
>
> BTW, the blocking problem with this patch is to deal with shutdown as
> discussed in the thread [1].
I will have a look.
In short, the problem is that at
> shutdown, we wait for walsender to send all pending data and ensure
> all data is
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 10:29 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 6:33 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > ---
> > +if (!pa_can_start(xid))
> > +return;
> > +
> > +/* First time through, initialize parallel apply worker state
> > hashtable. */
> > +
Hi
I got new warning
-o session.bc session.c
analyze.c: In function ‘transformStmt’:
analyze.c:550:21: warning: ‘sub_rteperminfos’ may be used uninitialized
[-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
550 | List *sub_rteperminfos;
| ^~~~
<-->if (isGeneralSelect
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 09:22:08AM +0300, Anton A. Melnikov wrote:
> Made a separate patch for it: v3-0001-Fix-dumps-filtering.patch
Well, the thing about this part is that is it is not needed: the same
can be achieved with 0002 in place.
> Yes, indeed. It will be really simpler.
> Made it in the
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 12:14 AM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 8:47 PM John Naylor
> wrote:
> These 4 patches make sense to me.We can merge them into 0002 patch
Okay, then I'll squash them when I post my next patch.
> and I'll do similar changes for functions for leaf node
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 10:36 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 9:15 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 7:35 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > >
> > > In the commit message, there is a statement like this
> > >
> > > "However, if the leader apply worker times out while
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 9:15 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 7:35 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > In the commit message, there is a statement like this
> >
> > "However, if the leader apply worker times out while attempting to
> > send a message to the
> > parallel apply worker, i
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 8:50 PM Michail Nikolaev
wrote:
>
> Hello again.
>
> Just small a fix for:
>
> > 2022-12-14 09:21:25.705 to
> > 2022-12-14 09:49:20.664 (after synchronization start, but before finish).
>
> Correct values are:
>
> 2022-12-14 09:49:31.340
> 2022-12-14 09:49:41.683
>
> So, it
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 21:02 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Thank you for updating the patches. Here are some comments for 0001
> and 0002 patches:
Thanks for your comments.
> I think it'd be better to write logs when the leader enters the
> serialization mode. It would be helpful for investigating i
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 7:37 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 2:44 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 2:12 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 9:16 PM Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > 4.
> > >
> > > + * Alth
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 7:35 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> In the commit message, there is a statement like this
>
> "However, if the leader apply worker times out while attempting to
> send a message to the
> parallel apply worker, it will switch to "partial serialize" mode - in this
> mode the lead
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 04:18:18PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> +1. I think this feature will also be useful in pg_walinspect.
> However, I'm a bit concerned that it can flood the running database
> disk - if someone generates a lot of FPI files.
pg_read_file() and pg_waldump can be fed absol
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 02:39:03PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> fclose() should be tested, too:
Sure. Done that too, and applied the change after a last lookup.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
I wrote:
> (Perhaps we should go further than this, and convert all these
> functions to just be DirectInputFunctionCallSafe wrappers
> around the corresponding input functions? That would save
> some duplicative code, but I've not done it here.)
I looked closer at that idea, and realized that it
Nikita Malakhov writes:
> While working on Pluggable TOAST [1] we found out that creation
> of new relation with CREATE TABLE AS... or CREATE TABLE LIKE -
> method
> static ObjectAddress create_ctas_internal(List *attrList, IntoClause *into)
> does not receive any metadata from columns or tables u
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 04:28:52PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Comments?
> + file = fopen(filename, PG_BINARY_W);
> + if (!file)
> + pg_fatal("could not open file \"%s\": %m", filename);
> +
> + if (fwrite(page, BLCKSZ, 1, file) != 1)
> +
> On Dec 26, 2022, at 1:29 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 06:23:29PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>> Thanks for the patch. I've made the above change as well as renamed
>> the test file name to be save_fpi.pl, everything else remains the same
>> as v11. Here's the v12
Hi hackers!
While working on Pluggable TOAST [1] we found out that creation
of new relation with CREATE TABLE AS... or CREATE TABLE LIKE -
method
static ObjectAddress create_ctas_internal(List *attrList, IntoClause *into)
does not receive any metadata from columns or tables used in query
(if any).
On 2022-12-26 Mo 12:47, Tom Lane wrote:
> Here's a proposed patch for making tsvectorin and tsqueryin
> report errors softly. We have to take the changes down a
> couple of levels of subroutines, but it's not hugely difficult.
Great!
>
> With the other patches I've posted recently, this cove
Em seg., 26 de dez. de 2022 às 15:45, Nikita Malakhov
escreveu:
> Hi,
>
> My bad, I was misleaded by unconditional return in ereturn_domain.
> Sorry for the noise.
>
By no means, the mistake was entirely mine, I apologize to you.
regards,
Ranier Vilela
Hi,
My bad, I was misleaded by unconditional return in ereturn_domain.
Sorry for the noise.
On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 7:05 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Nikita Malakhov writes:
> > Even with null context it does not turn to ereport, and returns dummy
> value
>
> Read the code. ArrayGetNItems passes NUL
Here's a proposed patch for making tsvectorin and tsqueryin
report errors softly. We have to take the changes down a
couple of levels of subroutines, but it's not hugely difficult.
A couple of points worthy of comment:
* To reduce API changes, I made the functions in
tsvector_parser.c and tsquer
On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 8:47 PM John Naylor
wrote:
>
> I wrote:
>
> > - Try templating out the differences between local and shared memory.
>
> Here is a brief progress report before Christmas vacation.
Thanks!
>
> I thought the best way to approach this was to go "inside out", that is,
> start
Hello again.
Just small a fix for:
> 2022-12-14 09:21:25.705 to
> 2022-12-14 09:49:20.664 (after synchronization start, but before finish).
Correct values are:
2022-12-14 09:49:31.340
2022-12-14 09:49:41.683
So, it looks like we lost about 10s of one of the tables WAL.
Hello.
Just a small story about small data-loss on logical replication.
We were logically replicating a 4 TB database from
> PostgreSQL 12.12 (Ubuntu 12.12-201-yandex.49163.d86383ed5b) on
> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by gcc (Ubuntu 7.5.0-3ubuntu1~18.04) 7.5.0,
> 64-bit
to
> PostgreSQL 14.
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 2:44 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 2:12 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 9:16 PM Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)
> > wrote:
> > >
> >
> > 4.
> >
> > + * Although the delay is applied in BEGIN messages, streamed
> > transactions
> >
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 6:59 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
In the commit message, there is a statement like this
"However, if the leader apply worker times out while attempting to
send a message to the
parallel apply worker, it will switch to "partial serialize" mode - in this
mode the leader serial
On 2022-12-25 Su 12:13, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 1:31 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>>> The reg* functions probably need a unified plan as to how far
>>> down we want to push non-error behavior.
>> I would be in favor of an aggressive approach.
> Here's a proposed p
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 6:33 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> ---
> +if (!pa_can_start(xid))
> +return;
> +
> +/* First time through, initialize parallel apply worker state
> hashtable. */
> +if (!ParallelApplyTxnHash)
> +{
> +HASHCTL
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 1:22 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Friday, December 23, 2022 5:20 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > I noticed a CFbot failure in one of the new testcases in 015_stream.pl which
> > comes from old 032_xx.pl. It's because I slightly adjusted the change si
Hi,
IsInstallXLogFileSegmentActive() is currently being used for assert
checks. How about making it an assert-only function to disable it on
production builds? This can shave an unused function on production
builds. We can easily switch back when there comes a real caller
outside of xlog.c. I'm at
Hi,
It looks like assign_checkpoint_completion_target() is defined [1],
but never used, because of which CheckPointSegments may miss to
account for changed checkpoint_completion_target. I'm attaching a tiny
patch to fix this.
Thoughts?
[1]
commit 88e982302684246e8af785e78a467ac37c76dee9
Author:
Dear Horiguchi-san,
> > Thus how about before entering an apply_delay, logrep worker sending a
> > kind of crafted feedback, which reports commit_data.end_lsn as
> > flushpos? A little tweak is needed in send_feedback() but seems to
> > work..
>
> Thanks for replying! I tested your saying but it
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 9:52 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Friday, December 23, 2022 5:20 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
>
> Since the GUC used to force stream changes has been committed, I removed that
> patch from the patch set here and rebased the testcases based on that commit.
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 12:59 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> I have done a review of that, and here are my notes:
> - The variable names were a bit inconsistent, so I have switched most
> of the new code to use "fullpage".
>
> - The new test has been renamed.
>
> - RestoreBlockImage() would report
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 3:41 PM Melih Mutlu wrote:
>
>> Do you have any use case in mind where the user has added a table to
>> the publication even though she doesn't want it to be replicated? One
>> thing that came to my mind is that due to some reason after adding a
>> table to the publication,
Hi Amit,
Amit Kapila , 23 Ara 2022 Cum, 09:39 tarihinde
şunu yazdı:
> I also have the same understanding but I think if we skip replicating
> some table due to the reason that the corresponding publication has
> not been refreshed then it is better to LOG that information instead
> of silently sk
On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 2:12 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 9:16 PM Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
>
> 4.
>
> + * Although the delay is applied in BEGIN messages, streamed transactions
> + * apply the delay in a STREAM COMMIT message. That's ok because no
> +
On Sun, Dec 25, 2022 at 4:55 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> > > This adds copying of the whole page (at least) at every WAL *record*
> > > read,
> >
> > In the worst case yes, but that may not always be true. On a typical
> > production server with decent write traffic, it happens that the
> > callers
On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 9:16 PM Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> On Thursday, December 22, 2022 3:02 PM Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> > Attached the updated patch.
> > Again, I used one basic patch in another thread to wake up logical
> > replication
> > worker shared in [2] for TAP
On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 3:28 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 8:56 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > OK, I removed the modification in 022_twophase_cascade.pl and combine
> > > > the two patches.
> > >
> > > Thank you for updating the patch. The v6 patch looks good to me
On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 9:10 PM David Rowley wrote
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2022 at 17:04, Richard Guo wrote:
> > Thanks for the test! I looked at this and found that with WCO
> > constraints we can also hit the buggy code. Based on David's test case,
> > I came up with the following in the morning.
>
55 matches
Mail list logo
