On 2025-Mar-26, Amul Sul wrote:
> The reason for the change is to revert to the behavior before commit
> #80d7f990496b1c, where recursion occurred regardless of the
> changed flags. This is also described in the header comment for
> ATExecAlterConstrDeferrability() (earlier it was for
> ATExecAlte
On 23.03.25 04:05, Andrew Jackson wrote:
> This is the first complaint I can recall hearing about that, so
exactly which ones are "many"?
I've tested a 2 before figuring out about the v3 issue. lldap[0] and the
docker image osixia/docker-openldap[1].
- lldap gives the following error message
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 3:06 PM Tender Wang wrote:
> The comment about notnullattnums in struct RangeTblEntry says that:
> * notnullattnums is zero-based set containing attnums of NOT NULL
> * columns.
>
> But in get_relation_notnullatts():
> rte->notnullattnums = bms_add_member(rte->notnullattnu
Andy Fan writes:
> Hi,
>>> The boring thing for the pool is it is [dbid + userId] based, which
>>> I mean if the dbid or userId is different with the connection in pool,
>>> they can't be reused. To reduce the effect of UserId, I think if we can
>>> start the pool with a superuser and then swit
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 07:56:29PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote:
> FWIW, the pg_stat_statements docs in a few places refer to
> queries that may look different but have the same meaning
> as “semantically equivalent”, this is why I used the same
> terminology here. But, I have no issue with the sim
Hi!
IMO, the psql reference has too many non-standard subsections (and too much
material in each) to strictly conform to our guidelines for application
documentation. It needs a Table of Contents of its own to improve
usability.
Attached.
David J.
From c419cd7d32f0b60671cfa652c312c889875031bc M
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> On 26 Mar 2025, at 00:01, Tom Lane wrote:
>> How did that work before? Perhaps somebody just now added a libpq
>> dependency to pg_regress.c?
> I believe the libpq dependency came in 66d6086cbcbfc8 which wasn't all that
> recent.
It looks like this has been broken
Hi,
>> The boring thing for the pool is it is [dbid + userId] based, which
>> I mean if the dbid or userId is different with the connection in pool,
>> they can't be reused. To reduce the effect of UserId, I think if we can
>> start the pool with a superuser and then switch the user information
Hi,
On 2025-03-22 19:09:55 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 09:58:37PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Attached v2.11
>
> > Subject: [PATCH v2.11 05/27] aio: Add io_method=io_uring
>
> Apart from some isolated cosmetic points, this is ready to commit:
>
> > + er
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 1:37 AM Steven Niu wrote:
>
>
>
> 在 2025/3/12 6:31, Masahiko Sawada 写道:
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 3:08 AM Steven Niu wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi, Masahiko
> >>
> >> Thanks for your comments! I understand your concern as you stated.
> >> However, my initial patch was
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 17:38, Andy Fan wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
Hi!
> Currently when a query needs some parallel workers, postmaster spawns
> some backend for this query and when the work is done, the backend
> exit. there are some wastage here, e.g. syscache, relcache, smgr cache,
> vfd cache and
Hi,
On 2025-03-25 12:39:56 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 02:58:37PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I don't know if that's an intentional or unintentional behavioral
> > difference.
> >
> > There are 2 1/2 ways around this:
> >
> > 1) Stop using IOSQE_ASYNC heuristic
> > 2a
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 4:38 AM Tom Lane wrote:
Hi,
>
> Here's a completed set of patches for bug #18815 [1] (which, briefly,
> is that the logrep worker opens/closes indexes multiple times and
> thereby breaks brininsertcleanup).
>
> 0001 adds a subscriber-side BRIN index to 013_partition.pl
hi.
ATPrepAlterColumnType forbids us to ALTER COLUMN SET DATA TYPE USING (expr)
for generated columns.
however we can still change the generated column type from non-text to text
or text type from one collation to another collation.
In ATExecAlterColumnType, we also need to set the generation
exp
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 5:24 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 5:15 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 5:08 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This looks mostly ready except the test changes. I believe when
> > > committing, we are going to squash all
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 10:18 PM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> On 21.03.25 06:58, Amul Sul wrote:
> >
> > []
> > Attached is the updated version, where the commit messages for patch
> > 0005 and 0006 have been slightly corrected. Additionally, a few code
> > comments have been updated to consist
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 5:30 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 5:54 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > *
> > +
> > + pg_createsubscriber
> > + option
> > +
> > +
> > + -a
> > + --all
> > +
> > +
> > + -D
> > + --pgdata
> > +
> > +datad
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 2:05 AM Euler Taveira wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025, at 8:07 AM, Shubham Khanna wrote:
>
> Apologies for the oversight. I have attached the patches now. Please
> find them included here.
>
>
> I started looking at this patch. When I started reading the commit message, I
>
On Sun, Feb 9, 2025 at 9:07 AM Andrey Borodin wrote:
>
> I've took into account note from Sergey that "offset" is better name for
> uuidv7() argument than "shift".
>
> > On 5 Feb 2025, at 03:02, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I was thinking about incorporating test like this.
> >>
> W
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 at 02:05, Euler Taveira wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025, at 8:07 AM, Shubham Khanna wrote:
>
> The following code is not accurate. If I specify --all, --database and
> --subscription, it will report only --database. The user will remove it and
> run
> again. At this time, --su
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 8:07 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I came across the following help message added in commit 1a759c83278:
>
> + HELP0(" WATCH_INTERVAL\n"
> + "number of seconds \\watch by default waits between
> executing the query buffer\n");
>
> It t
>
> So this comes down to forking the Postgres code to do the job. What I
> had in mind was a slightly different flow, where we would be able to
> push custom node attributes between the header parsing and the
> generation of the extension code. If we do that, there would be no
> need to fork the
Hello,
I came across the following help message added in commit 1a759c83278:
+ HELP0(" WATCH_INTERVAL\n"
+ "number of seconds \\watch by default waits between
executing the query buffer\n");
It took me a little while to understand it. I read "executing the
query buffe
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 04:23:15PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote:
> On 3/25/25 00:47, Sami Imseih wrote:
>> 1. Check out the upstream Postgres source for the given version I'm
>> generating jumble code for
>> 2. Modify the headers as needed to have the node attributes I want
>> 3. Call the gen_node_sup
Hi,
On 2025-03-25 09:15:43 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 11:57:58AM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > FWIW, I prototyped this, it's not hard.
> >
> > But it can't replace the current WARNING with 100% fidelity: If we read 60
> > blocks in a single smgrreadv, we today would woul
On Sun, Mar 23, 2025 at 6:25 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 2:21 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > The way to make this work is what I said before: move the planner's
> > collection of relation information to somewhere a bit earlier in
> > the planner. But not to outside the planner.
> I'
On 2025/03/21 10:12, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
Dear Fujii-san,
Thanks for the patch! It looks good to me.
I'm considering whether to back-patch these changes to older versions.
Since pg_recvlogical --drop-slot worked without --dbname in 9.4
but started failing unintentionally in 9.5, it
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 10:22:47AM -0700, Jacob Champion wrote:
> I looked into switching over to pgstat_report_activity(), but that
> wasn't designed to be called in the middle of backend initialization.
> It would take more work to make those calls safe/sane when `st_state
> == STATE_STARTING`. I
>
> At this point, I feel I've demonstrated the limit of what can be made into
> WARNINGs, giving us a range of options for now and into the beta. I'll
> rebase and move the 0002 patch to be in last position so as to tee up
> 0003-0004 for consideration.
>
And here's the rebase (after bde2fb797aae
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 08:17:17PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-03-25 09:15:43 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 11:57:58AM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > FWIW, I prototyped this, it's not hard.
> > >
> > > But it can't replace the current WARNING with 100% fidelity:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 11:56:50AM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> Here is the v8 version with the bug fix and performance stuff
> separated out.
Why not. I assume that you would merge these together?
> I also added the Assert code to ensure we always add
> something to the jumble buffer when jumbl
> If I get the difference right, semantically would apply to concepts
> related to linguistics, but that's not what we have here, so you are
> using a more general term.
FWIW, the pg_stat_statements docs in a few places refer to
queries that may look different but have the same meaning
as “sem
Hello Robert,
Fixed most of the recommendations. Going over one at a time.
> The documentation for the progressive_explain = { off | explain |
> analyze } option seems like it should go into more detail about how
> the "explain" and "analyze" values are different. I'm not 100% sure I
> know the a
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 07:24:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> fails to honor $query_jumble_ignore as the other if-branches do.
> Perhaps it's unlikely that a node would have both query_jumble_custom
> and query_jumble_ignore annotations, but still, the script would emit
> completely incorrect code if
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 09:18:06PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> Attached v2.12, with the following changes:
> TODO:
> Wonder if it's worth adding some coverage for when checksums are disabled?
> Probably not necessary?
Probably not necessary, agreed. Orthogonal to AIO, it's likely worth a
Michael Paquier writes:
> [ v6-0001-Add-custom-query-jumble-function-for-RangeTblEntr.patch ]
Couple of minor review comments ...
* In 5ac462e2b, this bit:
# node type
- if (($t =~ /^(\w+)\*$/ or $t =~ /^struct\s+(\w+)\*$/)
+ if ($query_jumble_custom)
+ {
+ #
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 11:58:21AM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote:
> "Since the queryid hash value is computed on the post-parse-analysis
> representation of the queries, the opposite is also possible: queries with
> identical texts might appear as separate entries, if they have different
> meanings as a
> On 26 Mar 2025, at 00:01, Tom Lane wrote:
> How did that work before? Perhaps somebody just now added a libpq
> dependency to pg_regress.c?
I believe the libpq dependency came in 66d6086cbcbfc8 which wasn't all that
recent.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
Thomas Munro writes:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 10:34 AM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> In file included from pg_regress.c:34:
>> /usr/local/include/libpq-fe.h:623:8: error: unknown type name 'pg_int64'
> Looks like it's mixing up /usr/local/include and our source tree...
Yeah. That's because the c
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 at 01:11, David Rowley wrote:
> I'm happy to proceed with the v7 version. I'm also happy to credit you
> as the primary author of it, given that you came up with the v2b
> patch. It might be best to extract the performance stuff that's in v7
> and apply that separately from th
Hi!
I felt you might have missed attaching the test patches added at [1].
Well, the tests were written for the initial proposal which (after
Michael's review and advices) has been fixed and updated. The original
tests became not relevant actually. That is why I dropped them.
This change is
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 04:56:53PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> The repeated-iteration approach taken in pgaio_closing_fd() isn't the
> prettiest, but it's hard to to imagine that ever being a noticeable.
Yep. I've reviewed the fixup code, and it looks all good.
> This survives a testrun where
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025, 7:40 PM Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025, 6:28 PM Álvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>
> On 2025-Mar-25, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > If this GUC sticks around, it should be at least PGC_SUSET (on
>
> > the analogy of compute_query_id) to make it harder
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 10:34 AM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> anaconda seems to be upset about this one [0]. I've spent all of 30
> seconds looking at it so far, but it appears to be using an old version of
> the header file.
>
> In file included from pg_regress.c:34:
> /usr/local/include/libpq-fe.h:6
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 09:41:21PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 6:00 AM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I agree with your patch 0001-Deprecate-pg_int64.patch. I don't see a
>> reason to keep the current arrangement around pg_int64.
>
> Thanks for looking! Pushed.
anaconda see
On Tue, 2025-03-25 at 17:28 +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> The "jumble names of temp tables" thread was briefly touching this [1],
> I'm starting a new thread since the others are already very long.
>
> [1]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAA5RZ0uNofEXfEfNw3uRN3D3oXkFPQ_s%2BhuLLHMKR_
> On 3/25/25 00:47, Sami Imseih wrote:
> > I know it was mentioned above by both Michael and Andrei that
> > AppendJumble should not be exposed. I am not sure I agree with
> > that. I think it should be exposed, along with
> > JUMBLE_FIELD, JUMBLE_FIELD_SINGLE and JUMBLE_STRING
> > and _jumbleList.
Hi,
On 2025-03-25 08:58:08 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> While having nagging thoughts that we might be releasing FDs before io_uring
> gets them into kernel custody, I tried this hack to maximize FD turnover:
>
> static void
> ReleaseLruFiles(void)
> {
> #if 0
> while (nfile + numAllocatedDes
On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 03:23:13PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I'm still aiming to commit this sometime early next week.
Committed. Thanks to everyone who chimed in on this thread.
While writing the attributions, I noticed that nobody seems to have
commented specifically on 0001. The closest
Hi,
On 2025-03-25 13:18:50 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 04:07:35PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2025-03-25 12:39:56 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 02:58:37PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > There are 2 1/2 ways around this:
> > > >
> > > > 1
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: not tested
Implements feature: not tested
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:not tested
Hi Dmitrii,
Paul Jungwirth and I reviewed this patch, and here are our comme
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025, at 8:07 AM, Shubham Khanna wrote:
> Apologies for the oversight. I have attached the patches now. Please
> find them included here.
I started looking at this patch. When I started reading the commit message, I
didn't understand why the options that provide names to objects ar
Hi,
I'd like to remind people planning to attend pgconf.dev the registration
for Advanced Patch Feedback Session closes on Friday (in ~2 days). If
you're interested in participating (as a contributor or a committer),
please sign up using the forms linked in the announcement.
kind regards
Tomas
O
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 04:07:35PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-03-25 12:39:56 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 02:58:37PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > There are 2 1/2 ways around this:
> > >
> > > 1) Stop using IOSQE_ASYNC heuristic
> > > 2a) Wait for all in-flig
Re: Álvaro Herrera
> Introduce squashing of constant lists in query jumbling
>
> pg_stat_statements produces multiple entries for queries like
> SELECT something FROM table WHERE col IN (1, 2, 3, ...)
>
> depending on the number of parameters, because every element of
> ArrayExpr is individua
>
> The original reason we wanted to issue warnings was to allow ourselves
> a chance to change the meaning of parameters, add new parameters, or
> even remove parameters without causing restore failures. If there are
> any ERRORs that might limit our flexibility I think we should downgrade
> those
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 02:58:37PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-03-25 08:58:08 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > While having nagging thoughts that we might be releasing FDs before io_uring
> > gets them into kernel custody, I tried this hack to maximize FD turnover:
> >
> > static void
> > Re
> At the same time the proposal to do squashing by default
> does not seem to be strictly dependent on that, so maybe they could be
> considered as isolated ideas.
Here is a patch to remove the GUC, if we settle on doing so.
--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
v1-0001-Remove-the-query_id_s
> > If this GUC sticks around, it should be at least PGC_SUSET (on
> > the analogy of compute_query_id) to make it harder to break
> > pg_stat_statements that way.
>
> I have no problem making it superuser-only, and I can see making "on" be
> the default. I am not opposed to removing it completely
> On 24 Mar 2025, at 13:42, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> LGTM. I think this is RFC. Updated CF entry.
Thanks all for review, committed.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 5:43 AM Antonin Houska wrote:
> Can you please give me an example? I don't recall seeing a lock upgrade in the
> tree. That's the reason I tried rather hard to avoid that.
VACUUM has to upgrade the lock in order to truncate away pages at the
end of the table.
Or just:
BEG
On Tue, 2025-03-25 at 10:53 -0400, Corey Huinker wrote:
>
> So this patch swings the pendulum a bit back towards accepting some
> things as errors.
Not exactly. I see patch 0001 as a change to the function signatures
from regclass to schemaname/relname, both for usability as well as
control over
>
>
>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025, 6:28 PM Álvaro Herrera
wrote:
On 2025-Mar-25, Tom Lane wrote:
> If this GUC sticks around, it should be at least PGC_SUSET (on
> the analogy of compute_query_id) to make it harder to break
> pg_stat_statements that way.
I have no problem making it superuser-only,
> > Attached is the second one, with more tests coverage with attribute
> > aliases (these being ignored exists in stable branches, but why not
> > while on it) and table aliases, and the fixes for the issues pointed
> > out by Christoph. I'll double-check all that again tomorrow. Please
> > find
Christoph Berg writes:
> For 2), Tom said that configurability is 1) often much less useful
> than originally planned, and 2) tools have to cope with both settings
> anyway, making implementing them harder. Plus, switching at run-time
> makes the result even less predictable.
To clarify that last
On 21.03.25 06:58, Amul Sul wrote:
I think the next step here is that you work to fix Álvaro's concerns
about the recursion structure.
Yes, I worked on that in the attached version. I refactored
ATExecAlterConstraintInternal() and moved the code that updates the
pg_constraint entry into a separ
> On 19 Mar 2025, at 11:03, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
>> On 19 Mar 2025, at 06:38, Steven Niu wrote:
>
>> During browsing the code, I found one missing PQclear in function
>> StreamLogicalLog(). It's a very small problem as it only happens in error
>> condition. However since another similar
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 08:57:27PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 11:45 AM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> * I don't think this matches the parse_bool() behavior exactly. For
>> example, parse_bool() appears to accept inputs like "t" to mean "true".
>> This is also proba
В письме от вторник, 25 марта 2025 г. 17:57:46 MSK пользователь Nathan Bossart
написал:
> In any case, AFAICT the votes are somewhat evenly divided at the moment, so
> I do not intend to proceed with this patch for now.
Counting votes does not lead anywhere, as I can ask friends and colleagues t
Comments on 0001
@@ -87,6 +87,21 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
command-line arguments:
+
+ -a
+ --all
+
+
+ Create one subscription per all non-template databases on the target
+ server. Automatically generated names for subscriptions, publications,
Already provided comment on this part.
+/*
+
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 11:57:58AM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-03-25 07:11:20 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 10:52:19PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > If we want to implement it, I think we could introduce PGAIO_RS_WARN,
> > > which
> > > then could tell the stag
Hi,
On 2025-03-25 06:33:21 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 10:30:27PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2025-03-24 17:45:37 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > (We may be due for a test mode that does smgrreleaseall() at every
> > > CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS()?)
> >
> > I suspect we are.
On 2025-Mar-25, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> With commit f4e53e10b6ce we introduced a way to flip the NO INHERIT bit
> on not-null constraints. However, because of the way the grammar
> dealt with ALTER CONSTRAINT, we were too blind to see a way to implement
> it using the existing production.
Patch
With commit f4e53e10b6ce we introduced a way to flip the NO INHERIT bit
on not-null constraints. However, because of the way the grammar
dealt with ALTER CONSTRAINT, we were too blind to see a way to implement
it using the existing production. It turns out that we can remove it,
so the commands w
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 11:26:14AM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-03-25 06:33:21 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 10:30:27PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2025-03-24 17:45:37 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > (We may be due for a test mode that does smgrreleaseall()
Hi,
On 2025-03-25 07:11:20 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 10:52:19PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Is it actually sane to use WARNING here? At least for ZERO_ON_ERROR that
> > could
> > trigger a rather massive flood of messages to the client in a *normal*
> > situation. I'm
Hi,
On 2025-03-25 17:10:19 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 2:18 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Attached v2.12, with the following changes:
>
> Here's a tiny fixup to make io_concurrency=0 turn on
> READ_BUFFERS_SYNCHRONOUSLY as mooted in a FIXME. Without this, AIO
> will still
Re: Michael Paquier
> Attached is the second one, with more tests coverage with attribute
> aliases (these being ignored exists in stable branches, but why not
> while on it) and table aliases, and the fixes for the issues pointed
> out by Christoph. I'll double-check all that again tomorrow. Plea
> In my experience these often not work well with pg_stat_statements today
> because
> of their own bloat problem, just like with temp tables. You quickly have way
> too many
> unique entries, and your query text file accumulates a lot of duplicative
> entries
> (since the same query text gets r
Apologies for the noise, I overlooked a compiler warning.
fixed.
-greg
> On Mar 25, 2025, at 7:47 AM, Burd, Greg wrote:
>
> Matthias,
>
> Rebased patch attached.
>
> Changes in v14:
> * UpdateContext now the location I've stored estate, resultRelInfo, etc.
> * Reuse the result from the p
> On 20 Mar 2025, at 08:39, Rahila Syed wrote:
Thanks for the new version, I believe this will be a welcome tool in the
debugging toolbox.
I took a cleanup pass over the docs with among others the below changes:
* You had broken the text in paragraphs, but without tags they are
rendered a
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 10:52:19PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-03-24 19:20:37 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 09:58:37PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > +static pg_attribute_always_inline PgAioResult
> > > +buffer_readv_complete_one(uint8 buf_off, Buffer buffer, uin
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 10:30:27PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-03-24 17:45:37 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > (We may be due for a test mode that does smgrreleaseall() at every
> > CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS()?)
>
> I suspect we are. I'm a bit afraid of even trying...
>
> ...
>
> It's extremely
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 5:20 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 6:36 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 12:58 PM Amit Langote
> > wrote:
> > > Btw, about ec_clear_derived_clauses():
> > >
> > > @@ -749,7 +749,7 @@ remove_rel_from_eclass(EquivalenceClass *ec,
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 6:37 PM John Naylor wrote:
>
> I'll take a look at the configure
> checks soon, since I had some questions there.
One other thing I forgot to mention: The previous test function had
local constants that the compiler was able to fold, resulting in no
actual vector instructi
On 25.03.25 12:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Hello
On 2025-Mar-25, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
A patch in the NOT ENFORCED constraints patch series proposes to refactor
some of the code added by this patch series ([0] patch v18-0001). I noticed
that the code paths from this patch series do not call
I
25.03.2025 13:52, Yura Sokolov пишет:
> Good day, Andres
>
> 24.03.2025 16:08, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2025-03-24 13:41:17 +0300, Yura Sokolov wrote:
>>> 21.03.2025 19:33, Andres Freund wrote:
I'd also like to know a bit more about the motivation here - I can easily
believe that you h
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 6:37 PM John Naylor wrote:
> I'll take a look at the configure
> checks soon, since I had some questions there.
I'm leaning towards a length limit for v15-0001 so that inlined
instructions are likely to be unrolled. Aside from lack of commit
message, I think that one is re
On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 9:48 PM Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
>
> So, I'm not sure I like the idea that much, but thinking out loud: I wonder if
> we could bypass the "active" slot checks in 16 and 17 and use injection
> points as
> proposed as of 18 (as we need the injection points changes proposed in
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 3:22 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> Dear Shubham,
>
> > The attached patches contain the suggested changes.
>
> Thanks for updating the patch. I reviewed only 0001 because they would be
> committed separately.
> Few comments:
>
> 01.
> ```
> + For every non-te
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 at 21:14, Bykov Ivan wrote:
> As I can see, your patch has the same idea as my
> v2-0001-Query-ID-Calculation-Fix-Variant-B.patch from [1].
> I think it would be better to extract the jumble buffer update with hash
> calculation into a function
> (CompressJumble in my patch).
On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 5:54 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> *
> +
> + pg_createsubscriber
> + option
> +
> +
> + -a
> + --all
> +
> +
> + -D
> + --pgdata
> +
> +datadir
> +
> + -P
> + --publisher-server
> +
> +connstr
>
> Most of this
Dear Ashutosh,
> The new description doesn't mention the link between the source and
> target database.
Yes, I intentionally removed.
> And I think it's incorrect. Not all databases on the
> target server will receive a subscription. Only those which have the
> same name as a database on the sou
Hello
On 2025-Mar-25, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> A patch in the NOT ENFORCED constraints patch series proposes to refactor
> some of the code added by this patch series ([0] patch v18-0001). I noticed
> that the code paths from this patch series do not call
> InvokeObjectPostAlterHook() or CacheI
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 5:15 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 5:08 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> >
> > This looks mostly ready except the test changes. I believe when
> > committing, we are going to squash all three into a single commit. Is
> > that correct?
> >
>
> I would not pr
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 6:36 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 12:58 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > Btw, about ec_clear_derived_clauses():
> >
> > @@ -749,7 +749,7 @@ remove_rel_from_eclass(EquivalenceClass *ec,
> > SpecialJoinInfo *sjinfo,
> > * drop them. (At this point, any
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 6:56 PM Alexander Pyhalov
wrote:
> Alexander Korotkov писал(а) 2025-03-24 11:49:
> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 9:07 AM Alexander Pyhalov
> > wrote:
> >> Alexander Korotkov писал(а) 2025-03-24 04:21:
> >> > Hi, Alexander!
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 6:04 PM Alexande
Hi,
Rebased version of the patch is attached.
--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsoft
From d2eb46fb18258931f65e2b01ac6b406255f3c575 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2024 15:01:48 +0300
Subject: [PATCH v10] Introduce file_copy_method GUC
This GUC can be set to ei
Matthias,
Rebased patch attached.
Changes in v14:
* UpdateContext now the location I've stored estate, resultRelInfo, etc.
* Reuse the result from the predicate on the partial index.
-greg
> On Mar 7, 2025, at 5:47 PM, Matthias van de Meent
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 at 13:40, Burd,
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 5:08 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> This looks mostly ready except the test changes. I believe when
> committing, we are going to squash all three into a single commit. Is
> that correct?
>
I would not prefer to commit 0003 as it is primarily because of test
+# run pg_create
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
