Thanks for your review again.
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 at 21:49, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 6:51 PM japin wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Feb 2021 at 17:50, Bharath Rupireddy
>> wrote:
>> We will get cell == NULL when we iterate all items in publist. I use it
&g
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 at 09:58, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 8:13 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 11:41 AM japin wrote:
>> > > IIUC, with the current patch, the new ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... ADD/DROP
>> > >
n the comment.
>
After review the code. It says "just as it's done in XLogSendPhysical", not
fill
out the sendtime with XLogSendPhysical.
My bad. Sorry for the noise. I will close this cf entry.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 at 17:36, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 11:19 PM japin wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 at 00:22, Simon Riggs
>> wrote:
>> > As you may be aware the NOT VALID qualifier currently only applies to
>> > CH
LWLockInitialize(&lock->lock,
LWTRANCHE_PREDICATE_LOCK_MANAGER);
--
Best regards
Japin Li
diff --git a/src/backend/storage/lmgr/lwlock.c b/src/backend/storage/lmgr/lwlock.c
index 2fa90cc095..108e652179 100644
--- a/src/backend/storage/lmgr/lwlock.c
+++ b/src/b
/*
* (5) turn off the idle-in-transaction timeout
*/
```
Please mention about idle-session timeout and check another comment.
Thanks! Add the comment for idle-session timeout.
--
Best regards
Japin Li
>From ca226701bd04d7c7f766776094610ef6a3e96279 Mon Sep 17 00:00
* NB: We count on this to protect us against problems with refreshing
the
-* data using TABLE_INSERT_FROZEN.
-*/
- CheckTableNotInUse(matviewRel, "REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW");
+ relowner = matviewRel->rd_rel->relowner;
After apply the patch, there i
On Fri, 08 Jan 2021 at 17:24, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 1:50 PM japin wrote:
>> Thanks for updating the patch!
>>
>> + /* Get the data generating query. */
>> + dataQuery = get_matview_query(stm
On Sat, 09 Jan 2021 at 09:38, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 9:50 PM japin wrote:
>> > Attaching v3 patches, please consider these for further review.
>> >
>>
>> I find that both the declaration and definition of
>> match_matview_wit
her, see \d+
> t1, there will not be any associated publication in the output
> 6) execute alter subscription refresh publication on the subscriber,
> with the expectation that it should not receive the data from the
> publisher for the table t1 since it's dropped from the publication in
> (5)
> 7) insert into table t1 on the publisher
> 8) still the newly inserted data in (7) from the publisher, will be
> received into the table t1 in the subscriber
>
> IIUC, the behaviour of ALTER PUBLICATION DROP TABLE from the docs and
> the above use case, it looks like a bug to me. If I'm wrong, can
> someone correct me?
>
Yes, if we modify the publication, we should refresh the subscription on
each subscriber. It looks strange for me, especially for partitioned
tables [1].
> Thoughts?
>
Can we trace the different between publication and subscription, and
auto-refresh subscription on subscriber?
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1D6DCFD2-0F44-4A18-BF67-17C2697B1631%40hotmail.com
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
replicate the records.
As I said in [1], if we don't insert a new data in step-5, it will not
replicate the records.
In both cases, the AlterSubscription_refresh() call RemoveSubscriptionRel()
and logicalrep_worker_stop_at_commit(). However, if we insert a data in
step-5, it doesn't work a
On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 at 13:39, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 9:58 AM japin wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 at 11:37, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 6:51 PM Bharath Rupireddy
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >&g
gt;> true in pgoutput_change(). Maybe the walsender should look at the
>> catalogue pg_publication_rel in is_publishable_relation()?
>>
>
> We must be somewhere checking pg_publication_rel before sending the
> decoded change because otherwise, we would have sent the c
On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 at 19:32, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 4:47 PM Li Japin wrote:
>> IIUC the logical replication only replicate the tables in publication, I
>> think
>> when the tables that aren't in publication should not be replicated.
>
id 0 is valid because it
>> will be applicable only during the table sync phase, the comment in the
>> LogicalRepWorker structure says that.
>>
>> And also, I think, expecting the apply worker to be closed this way doesn't
>> make sense because the apply worke
e:
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 5:23 PM japin wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 at 19:32, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>> > > > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 4:47 PM Li Japin wrote:
>> > > > &g
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 at 17:23, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 4:47 PM Li Japin wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Jan 12, 2021, at 5:47 PM, japin wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 at 14:38, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 11
Hi,
While reading the code about logical replication, I found that
WalSndPrepareWrite function says it use XLogSendPhysical to fill out the
sendtime, however, it actually done by WalSndWriteData. It looks like a
typo, attaching a very small patch to correct it.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu
On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 at 15:32, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Thu, 14 Jan 2021 06:46:35 +, Li Japin wrote in
>>
>> On Jan 14, 2021, at 12:56 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
>> mailto:ashutosh.bapat@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Japin,
>> Thanks for the r
On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 at 20:19, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 5:36 PM Li Japin wrote
>> Do we really need to access PUBLICATIONRELMAP in this patch? What if
>> we just set it to false in the else condition of (if (publish &&
>> (relkind != REL
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 at 14:50, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 11:33 AM Hou, Zhijie
> wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 5:36 PM Li Japin wrote
>> > > Do we really need to access PUBLICATIONRELMAP in this patch? What if
>>
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 at 15:49, japin wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 at 14:50, Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 11:33 AM Hou, Zhijie
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 5:36 PM Li Japin wrote
>>> > > Do we reall
the meantime, can you add the test case in the patch as
>> requested earlier as well.
>
> @Li Japin Please let me know if you have already started to work on
> the test case, otherwise I can make a 0002 patch for the test case and
> post.
>
Yeah, I'm working on the
944/
>
Thanks for the updated patch.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
utFunctionCall(typclass->typoutput, values[i]);
pq_sendcountedtext(out, outputstr, strlen(outputstr), false);
pfree(outputstr);
}
Attached is a samll patch to fix it.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
diff --git a/src/ba
On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 at 15:59, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 1:16 PM japin wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I find that the outputstr variable in logicalrep_write_tuple() only use in
>> `else` branch, I think we can narrow the scope, just
ALTER TABLE .. ADD table_constraint [ NOT VALID ]
ALTER TABLE .. VALIDATE CONSTRAINT constraint_name
Should we implement unique index valid/not valid same as foreign key and
CHECK constraints?
3. If we use the syntax to valid/not valid the unique, should we support
other constraints, such as foreign key and CHECK constraints?
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
t partition key values from the unique key.
>>
>> At the end of the nested loop, should there be an assertion that
>> partkey->partnatts partition key values have been found ?
>> This can be done by using a counter (initialized to 0) which is incremented
>> when a m
ether this chagnges cause
other problems or not. Any thought?
[1] -
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/ca+hiwqgkfjfydeq5vhph6eqpkjsbfpddy+j-kxyfepqedts...@mail.gmail.com
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
>From 7496f20ccfda7687333db9e5c43227ee30e4eda9 Mon
On Tue, 19 Jan 2021 at 23:45, Tom Lane wrote:
> japin writes:
>> When I review the [1], I find that the tuple's nulls array use char type.
>> However there are many places use boolean array to repsent the nulls array,
>> so I think we can replace the char type n
ALTER SYSTEM in that list either.
> If this was C code, maybe we could get away with just changing such
> references as we find them, but I don't think we'd want the
> documentation to be in an inconsistent state regarding that.
>
I have already mentioned this in [1], however it seems unattractive.
[1] -
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/199703E4-A795-4FB8-911C-D0DE9F51519C%40hotmail.com
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
make another connection.
> 3) If multiple publications are specified in the CREATE SUBSCRIPTION
> query, IIUC, with your patch, the query fails even if at least one of
> the publications doesn't exist. Should we throw a warning in this case
> and allow the subscription be created for other existing
> publications?
>
+1. If all the publications do not exist, we should throw an error.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
the reader
>> because it's called even before the fsync method is called. As I
>> commented above, calling to fsyncMethodCalled() can be eliminated.
>> That way, this function is called at only once. So do we really need
>> this function?
>
> Thanks to your comments, I removed them.
>
>
>> * As far as I read the code, issue_xlog_fsync() seems to do fsync even
>> if enableFsync is false. Why does the function return false in that
>> case? I might be missing something.
>
> IIUC, the reason is that I thought that each fsync functions like
> pg_fsync_no_writethrough() check enableFsync.
>
> If this code doesn't check, m_wal_sync_time may be incremented
> even though some sync methods like SYNC_METHOD_OPEN don't call to sync
> some data to the disk at the time.
>
>> * void is missing as argument?
>>
>> * s/mothod/method/
>
> I removed them.
>
>
> Regards,
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
ly need to increment m_wal_sync
> after doing fsync we can write the code without an additional variable
> as follows:
>
> if (enableFsync)
> {
> switch (sync_method)
> {
> case SYNC_METHOD_FSYNC:
> #ifdef HAVE_FSYNC_WRITETHROUGH
> case SYNC_METHOD_FSYNC_WRITETHROUGH:
> #endif
> #ifdef HAVE_FDATASYNC
> case SYNC_METHOD_FDATASYNC:
> #endif
> WalStats.m_wal_sync++;
> if (track_wal_io_timing)
> INSTR_TIME_SET_CURRENT(start);
> break;
> default:
> break;
> }
> }
>
> (do fsync and error handling here)
>
>/* increment the i/o timing and the number of times to fsync WAL data */
>if (track_wal_io_timing)
>{
>INSTR_TIME_SET_CURRENT(duration);
>INSTR_TIME_SUBTRACT(duration, start);
>WalStats.m_wal_sync_time = INSTR_TIME_GET_MICROSEC(duration);
>}
>
> I think we can change the first switch-case to an if statement.
>
+1. We can also narrow the scope of "duration" into "if (track_wal_io_timing)"
branch.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
non_existent_publication;?
>
> Or
>
> Do you mean when we drop publications from a subscription? If yes, do
> we have a way to drop a publication from the subscription? See below
> one of my earlier questions on this.
> "I wonder, why isn't dropping a publication from a list of
> publications that are with subscription is not allowed?"
> At least, I see no ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... DROP PUBLICATION mypub1 or
> something similar?
>
Why we do not support ALTER SUBSCRIPTION...ADD/DROP PUBLICATION? When we
have multiple publications in subscription, but I want to add/drop a single
publication, it is conveient. The ALTER SUBSCRIPTION...SET PUBLICATION...
should supply the completely publications.
Sorry, this question is unrelated with this subject.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
7, mypub8;
I think it's more convenient. Any thoughts?
[1] -
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/MEYP282MB16690CD5EC5319FC35B2F78AB6BD0%40MEYP282MB1669.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 at 11:47, japin wrote:
> Hi, hackers
>
> When I read the discussion in [1], I found that update subscription's
> publications
> is complicated.
>
> For example, I have 5 publications in subscription.
>
> CREATE SUBSCRIPTION mysub1 CONN
On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 at 21:55, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 5:18 PM japin wrote:
>> > Do you mean when we drop publications from a subscription? If yes, do
>> > we have a way to drop a publication from the subscription? See below
>> > one o
Hi, Bharath
Thanks for your reviewing.
On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 at 12:55, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 9:25 AM japin wrote:
>> > I think it's more convenient. Any thoughts?
>>
>> Sorry, I forgot to attach the patch.
>
> As I mentioned ear
On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 at 13:46, japin wrote:
> Hi, Bharath
>
> Thanks for your reviewing.
>
> On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 at 12:55, Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 9:25 AM japin wrote:
>>> > I think it's more convenient. Any thoughts?
&g
rSubscription_refresh(sub, copy_data);
}
break;
}
Should we fix the documentation or the code? I'd be inclined fix the
documentation.
[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/sql-altersubscription.html
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu In
DD
> PUBLICATION, then it refreshes all the returned publications [3]. I
> believe this is also true with ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... DROP
> PUBLICATION.
>
> So, I think the new syntax, ALTER SUBSCRIPTION .. ADD/DROP PUBLICATION
> will refresh the new and existing publications.
>
Yes! It will refresh the new and existing publications.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 at 16:59, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 9:18 AM japin wrote:
>>
>>
>> When I read the discussion in [1], I found that update subscription's
>> publications
>> is complicated.
>>
>> For example, I hav
On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 at 19:47, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 4:57 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 4:56 PM japin wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > When I read the documentation of ALTER SU
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 at 12:22, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:35 PM Li Japin wrote:
>> > I don't see any problem if ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... ADD PUBLICATION with
>> > refresh true refreshes only the newly added publications,
n publisher
postgres=# \dRp+
Publication mypub1
Owner | All tables | Inserts | Updates | Deletes | Truncates | Via root
---++-+-+-+---+--
japin | f |
On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 at 03:11, Euler Taveira wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2021, at 6:11 AM, japin wrote:
>> Thanks for updating the patch. Here are some comments:
> Thanks for your review. I updated the documentation accordingly.
>
>> The documentation says:
>>
>
lease ExplainState memory, however, it does not
make sence, I do not know why this does not work? So I try to create it in
queryDesc->estate->es_query_cxt memory context like queryDesc->totaltime, and
it works.
Attached fix the memory leakage in auto_explain.
ve bumped into this thread, and applied 0001. My guess is that
> one of the patches developped originally for logical replication
> defined atttypmod in LogicalRepRelation, but has finished by not using
> it. Nice catch.
Since the 0001 patch already be commited (4ad31bb2ef), we can remove
On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 at 19:16, japin wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 at 13:02, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 04:11:50PM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote:
>>> After the commit 3696a600e2, the last patch does not apply cleanly. I'm
>>> attachin
On Wed, 03 Feb 2021 at 02:13, Tom Lane wrote:
> japin writes:
>> Here's my analysis:
>> 1) In the explain_ExecutorEnd(), it will create a ExplainState on SQL
>> function
>> memory context, which is a long-lived, cause the memory grow up.
>
> Yeah, agreed
On Wed, 03 Feb 2021 at 13:15, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:07 AM japin wrote:
>> Attaching v3 patches, please consider these for further review.
>
> I think we can add a commitfest entry for this feature, so that the
> patches will be tested on cfb
On Fri, 05 Feb 2021 at 17:50, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 2:02 PM japin wrote:
>> On Wed, 03 Feb 2021 at 13:15, Bharath Rupireddy
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:07 AM japin wrote:
>> >> Attaching v3 patches, plea
l,-R'/home/postgres/pg11.2/lib'
LDFLAGS_EX =
LDFLAGS_SL =
LIBS = -lpgcommon -lpgport -lz -lreadline -lnsl -lsocket -lm
VERSION = PostgreSQL 11.2
Can anyone help me out? Thanks!
Best regards!
Japin Li
, I couldn't startup the postgresql,
and I find that the dlopen throw an error which lead postmaster
exit, and there is not more information.
regards,
Japin Li
, Li Japin wrote:
Yes, those errors does not impact the postgresql, but when
I use oracle_fdw extension, I couldn't startup the postgresql,
and I find that the dlopen throw an error which lead postmaster
exit, and there is not more information.
That may wall be a bug in oracle_fdw, since I
Hi, Konstantin
I test the patch-16 on postgresql master branch, and I find the
temporary table
cannot removed when we re-connect to it. Here is my test:
japin@ww-it:~/WwIT/postgresql/Debug/connpool$ initdb
The files belonging to this database system will be owned by user "japin".
This
conflict correctly.
Same as above.
Since the get_row_start_time_col_name() and get_row_end_time_col_name()
are similar, IMO we can pass a flag to get StartTime/EndTime column name,
thought?
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
On Wed, 03 Mar 2021 at 20:56, David Steele wrote:
> Do you know if you will have time to review this patch during the
> current commitfest?
>
Sorry for the late reply! I think I have time to review this patch
and I will do it later.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information T
urrent in get_new_heap_oid().
The others looks good to me.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
the system backend, how
> can I reach it? Is there any code or interface demonstration to show me?
> I am looking forward to your prompt reply. Heartfelt thanks.
Here is a document on how to create a new system catalog for PostgreSQL 11.
https://blog.japinli.top/2019/08/postgresql-new-cata
On Fri, 05 Mar 2021 at 19:48, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> Attaching v5 patch set for further review.
>
The v5 patch looks good to me, if there is no objection, I'll change the
cf status to "Ready for Committer" in few days.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
On Sun, 07 Mar 2021 at 14:25, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 11:49 AM Japin Li wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 05 Mar 2021 at 19:48, Bharath Rupireddy
>> wrote:
>> > Attaching v5 patch set for further review.
>> >
>>
>> The v5 pat
On Sun, 07 Mar 2021 at 17:33, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 12:13 PM Japin Li wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 07 Mar 2021 at 14:25, Bharath Rupireddy
>> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 11:49 AM Japin Li wrote:
>> >>
>> &g
ub->publications. Do you see any problems in doing so? If done
> that, we can discard the 0001 patch and comments (1) and (3) becomes
> irrelevant.
Thank you point out this. Fixed it in v7 patch set.
Please consider the v7 patch for futher review.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Info
to put the 'if (explainInfo)' as the first check. That
>> way, the check for skipData can be simplified.
>
> Changed.
>
> Thanks for review comments. Attaching v7 patch set with changes only
> in 0002 patch. Please have a look.
>
The v7 patch looks good to me, and
> to keep our options open about how REFRESH might be implemented
>> in future.
>
> That makes sense to me. Thanks for the comments. I'm fine to withdraw the
> patch.
>
> I would like to see if the 0001 patch(attaching here) will be useful
> at all. It just splits up the existing ExecRefreshMatView into a few
> functions to make the code readable.
+1.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
On Mon, 22 Mar 2021 at 11:14, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 7:21 PM Japin Li wrote:
>> Thank you point out this. Fixed it in v7 patch set.
>>
>> Please consider the v7 patch for futher review.
>
> Thanks for the patches. I just found the followi
de a final
>> version in good time.
>
> I took the liberty to address all the review comments and provide a v9
> patch on top of Japin's v8 patch-set.
>
>> (Also, please combine your patches into a single patch.)
>
> Done.
>
> Attaching v9 patch, please rev
On Tue, 06 Apr 2021 at 17:56, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 06.04.21 07:24, Japin Li wrote:
>>>> I think this patch is about ready to commit, but please provide a final
>>>> version in good time.
>>> I took the liberty to address all the review comments
ed
* objects; we MUST reset these to null before considering the
* lock to be acquired via fast-path.
*/
locallock->lock = NULL;
locallock->proclock = NULL;
GrantLockLocal(locallock, owner);
return LOCKACQUIRE_
On Thu, 08 Apr 2021 at 19:20, Japin Li wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Apr 2021 at 16:34, tanghy.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, April 7, 2021 5:28 PM Amit Kapila
>> wrote
>>
>>>Can you please check if the behavior is the same for PG-13? This is
>>>
_write_attrs().
> But, this change impacts on other several callers so is not as good as the
> first direction above, I think.
>
> If someone has any better idea, please let me know.
>
I think the first idea is better than the second. OTOH, can we release the
locks before SyncRepWaitForLSN(), since it already flush to local WAL files.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
The RelationIdGetRelation() comment says:
> Caller should eventually decrement count. (Usually,
> that happens by calling RelationClose().)
However, it doesn't do it in ReorderBufferProcessTXN().
I think we should close it, here is a patch that fixes it. Thoughts?
--
Regrad
st need to call RelationGetIndexList
> and then build the idattr list for relation->rd_replidindex.
Sorry, I don't know how can we build the idattr without open the index.
If we should open the index, then we should use NoLock, since the TRUNCATE
side hold AccessExclusiveLock. As Osumi points out in [1], The NoLock mode
assumes that the appropriate lock on the index is already taken.
Please let me know if I have misunderstood.
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/OSBPR01MB488834BDBD67BFF2FB048B3DED4E9%40OSBPR01MB4888.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 at 19:25, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 4:30 PM Japin Li wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 at 18:22, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:31 PM Amit Kapila
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 at 19:25, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 4:30 PM Japin Li wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 at 18:22, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:31 PM Amit Kapila
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >
On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 at 16:52, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 12:55 PM Japin Li wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 at 19:25, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 4:30 PM Japin Li wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On T
indexes?
> Ok. No need to traverse all the indexes. Will fix this part.
>
>> 2.
>> It is better to name the function as RelationGet...
> You are right. I'll modify this in my next version.
>
I took the liberty to address review comments and provide a v2 patch on top of
your&#x
On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 at 14:09, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 4:53 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 4:00 PM Japin Li wrote:
>> >
>> > The RelationIdGetRelation() comment says:
>> >
>> > > Caller should eve
On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 at 12:03, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> On Saturday, April 17, 2021 12:53 AM Japin Li
>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 at 17:19, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com
>> wrote:
>> > On Friday, April 16, 2021 5:50 PM Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>>
_for_list_of_tables, "");
+ /* ALTER TABLE xxx NO */
+ else if (Matches("ALTER", "TABLE", MatchAny, "NO"))
+ COMPLETE_WITH("FORCE ROW LEVEL SECURITY", "INHERIT");
/* ALTER TABLE xxx NO INHERIT */
else if (Matches("ALTER", "TABLE", MatchAny, "NO", "INHERIT"))
COMPLETE_WITH_SCHEMA_QUERY(Query_for_list_of_tables, "”);
Best regards.
--
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co,Ltd.
Japin Li
0001-Add-tab-complete-for-alter-table-rls.patch
Description: 0001-Add-tab-complete-for-alter-table-rls.patch
Sorry, I forgot add the subject.
--
Best regards
Japin Li
On Oct 23, 2020, at 1:19 PM, Li Japin
mailto:japi...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Hi, hackers
I find that ALTER TABLE xxx FORCE/NO FORCE ROW LEVEL SECURITY cannot support
tab complete.
The attached add the tab complete for rls.
diff -
Thanks Michael!
--
Best regards
Japin Li
> On Oct 24, 2020, at 9:49 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 04:37:18PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> No worries. Good catch. I'll try to test that and apply it later,
>> but by reading the code
ons in the doc file? I made an example:
```
Note that this values should be set to zero if you use postgres_fdw or some
Connection-pooling software, because connections might be closed unexpectedly.
```
Thanks for your advice! Attached v4.
--
Best regards
Japin Li
v4-0001-Allow-terminating-th
ION_TIMEOUT,
IDLE_IN_TRANSACTION_SESSION_TIMEOUT,
+ IDLE_SESSION_TIMEOUT,
/* First user-definable timeout reason */
USER_TIMEOUT,
/* Maximum number of timeout reasons */
Thanks for your review! Attached.
--
Best regards
Japin Li
v5-0001-Allow-terminating-the-idle-sessions.patch
Descripti
--
Best regards
Japin Li
On Nov 17, 2020, at 7:59 AM, David G. Johnston
mailto:david.g.johns...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 5:41 AM Li Japin
mailto:japi...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Thanks for your review! Attached.
Reading the doc changes:
I'd rather not
On Nov 17, 2020, at 10:53 AM, David G. Johnston
mailto:david.g.johns...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Monday, November 16, 2020, Li Japin
mailto:japi...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Consider setting this for specific users instead of as a server default.
Client connections managed by connec
ions might be needed.
Not sure! I find that Win32 do not support setitimer(), PostgreSQL emulate
setitimer() by creating a persistent thread to handle
the timer setting and notification upon timeout.
So if we want to replace it, I think we should open a new thread to achieve
this.
--
Best regards
Japin Li
mments comes from miscadmin.h.
Right, but how about before HOLD_INTERRUPTS()?
If so, only calling handle_sig_alarm() is occurred, and
Setitimer will not be set, I think.
Yeah, it might be occurred. Any suggestions to fix it?
--
Best regards
Japin Li
cause any intrreputions might be occured.
+*/
+ sigalrm_delivered = true;
schedule_alarm(GetCurrentTimestamp());
+ }
}
```
Thanks for your suggestion. Attached!
--
Best regards
Japin Li
v7-0001-Allow-terminating-the-idle-sessions.patch
Description
ITED
>
> -Original Message-
> From: kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 11:05 AM
> To: 'japin'
> Cc: David G. Johnston ; Kyotaro Horiguchi
> ; Thomas Munro ;
> bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com; pgsql-hackers@lists.postg
outs
*/
if (disable_idle_in_transaction_timeout)
{
I will send a new patch if there is not other comments.
--
Best Regards,
Japin Li
wait a bit
first.
Got this one committed as of d03d754.
—
Michael
--
Best regards
Japin Li
cache_plan is true, the plan is saved into our plan hashtable
- * so that we don't need to plan it again.
*/
static SPIPlanPtr
ri_PlanCheck(const char *querystr, int nargs, Oid *argtypes,
--
Best regards
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
cache_plan-to-ri_PlanCheck
On Nov 24, 2020, at 11:20 PM, David G. Johnston
mailto:david.g.johns...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 11:22 PM Li Japin
mailto:japi...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
How about use “foreign-data wrapper” replace “postgres_fdw”?
I don't see much value in avoiding mention
n't exceed 2147483647.
The first error message is reported by anychar_typmodin(), and the later
is reported by gram.y. IMO, the syntax error for varchar(n) is more
confused.
Any thoughts?
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
SERT INTO tbl VALUES (E'\u');
^
"\u" is valid unicode [1], why not we cannot insert it?
[1] https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U.pdf
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
On Sat, 13 Nov 2021 at 21:52, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 11/13/21 00:40, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 4:32 PM Japin Li wrote:
>>> When I try to insert an Unicode "\u", there is an error $subject.
>>>
>>> postgres=# CREA
On Sat, 13 Nov 2021 at 23:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> Japin Li writes:
>> postgres=# CREATE TABLE tbl (s varchar(2147483647));
>> ERROR: length for type varchar cannot exceed 10485760
>> LINE 1: CREATE TABLE tbl (s varchar(2147483647));
>> ^
&
1 - 100 of 441 matches
Mail list logo
