Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 2018-07-20 08:56:32 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 04:50:06PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2018-07-20 08:46:50 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 07:18:32PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I have found the argument about circular dependencies

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 04:50:06PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2018-07-20 08:46:50 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 07:18:32PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I have found the argument about circular dependencies rather sensible >> FWIW. So at the end it seems to me that we

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 2018-07-20 08:46:50 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 07:18:32PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Andres Freund writes: > >> FWIW, I was off the last few days. I personally think the reasoning to > >> leave out pg_class, pg_index etc. is bad. We should just make them work > >>

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 07:18:32PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: >> FWIW, I was off the last few days. I personally think the reasoning to >> leave out pg_class, pg_index etc. is bad. We should just make them work >> and create toast tables as well. > > If it's easy to make

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

Hi, On 2018-07-20 07:49:11 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > So, I have been playing with the previous patch and tortured it through > > a couple of upgrade scenarios, where it proves to work. Attached is an > > updated patch

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > So, I have been playing with the previous patch and tortured it through > a couple of upgrade scenarios, where it proves to work. Attached is an > updated patch which adds toast tables except for pg_class, pg_attribute, > pg_index

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 7/17/18, Michael Paquier wrote: > [... digging ...] > This comes from get_rel_infos where large objects are treated as user > data. Rather than the comment you added, I would rather do the > following: > "Large object catalogs and toast tables are mutually exclusive and large > object data is

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 06:03:26PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 02:55:07PM +0700, John Naylor wrote: >> I didn't dig deeper, since TOAST and the large object facility are >> mutually exclusive so there shouldn't be a toast table here anyway. >> Hope this helps. > > [...

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 02:55:07PM +0700, John Naylor wrote: > I didn't dig deeper, since TOAST and the large object facility are > mutually exclusive so there shouldn't be a toast table here anyway. > Hope this helps. [... digging ...] This comes from get_rel_infos where large objects are

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 7/17/18, Michael Paquier wrote: > I was just having a second look at this patch, and did a bit more tests > with pg_upgrade which passed. > > +-- 2. pg_largeobject and pg_largeobject_metadata, to avoid problems > +-- with pg_upgrade > John, what's actually the failure that was seen here? It

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 03:47:38PM +0700, John Naylor wrote: > I hope you don't mind, but since it might be tedious to piece together > the addenda I left behind in this thread, I thought it might be useful > to update Joe's patch. The attached was rebased over the new > regression test, passes

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 03:47:38PM +0700, John Naylor wrote: > I hope you don't mind, but since it might be tedious to piece together > the addenda I left behind in this thread, I thought it might be useful > to update Joe's patch. The attached was rebased over the new > regression test, passes

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 09:19:35PM -0400, Joe Conway wrote: > If you can wait for the next commitfest (the original one I put the > patch into, i.e. September) I am committed to making it happen. But if > you are anxious to getting this into the current commitfest, go for it. > I am in the middle

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 07/09/2018 09:16 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 02:45:26PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 15.06.18 21:15, Joe Conway wrote: >>> Not surprising -- thanks for the update. >>> It occurred to be that we could go further and create most toast tables

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 02:45:26PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 15.06.18 21:15, Joe Conway wrote: >> Not surprising -- thanks for the update. >> >>> It occurred to be that we could go further and create most toast >>> tables automatically by taking advantage of the fact that the toast >>>

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 15.06.18 21:15, Joe Conway wrote: > Not surprising -- thanks for the update. > >> It occurred to be that we could go further and create most toast >> tables automatically by taking advantage of the fact that the toast >> creation function is a no-op if there are no varlena attributes. The >>

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 2018-02-18 11:18:49 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway writes: > > Is there really a compelling reason to not just create toast tables for > > all system catalogs as in the attached? > > What happens when you VACUUM FULL pg_class? (The associated toast table > would have to be nonempty for

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 2/20/18, Michael Paquier wrote: > Regression tests of pg_upgrade are failing as follows: > New cluster database "postgres" is not empty > Failure, exiting > + rm -rf /tmp/pg_upgrade_check-Xn0ZLe I looked into this briefly. The error comes from check_new_cluster_is_empty() in

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 06/15/2018 02:40 PM, John Naylor wrote: > On 2/19/18, Joe Conway wrote: >> The attached does exactly this. Gives all system tables toast tables >> except pg_class, pg_attribute, and pg_index, and includes cat version >> bump and regression test in misc_sanity. >> >> Any further discussion,

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 2/19/18, Joe Conway wrote: > The attached does exactly this. Gives all system tables toast tables > except pg_class, pg_attribute, and pg_index, and includes cat version > bump and regression test in misc_sanity. > > Any further discussion, comments, complaints? Hi Joe, There's been a little

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Joe Conway wrote: > Is there really a compelling reason to not just create toast tables for > all system catalogs as in the attached? Then we could just check for 0 > rows in misc_sanity.sql. +1. I don't have a huge problem with excluding a

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 02/18/2018 11:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway writes: >> Is there really a compelling reason to not just create toast tables for >> all system catalogs as in the attached? > > What happens when you VACUUM FULL pg_class? (The associated toast table > would have to be

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

Joe Conway writes: > Is there really a compelling reason to not just create toast tables for > all system catalogs as in the attached? What happens when you VACUUM FULL pg_class? (The associated toast table would have to be nonempty for the test to prove much.) I'm fairly

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 02/17/2018 11:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway writes: >> Yes, exactly. I'm fine with not backpatching, just wanted to raise the >> possibility. I will push later today to HEAD (with a catalog version bump). > > BTW, I was wondering if it'd be a good idea to try to

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 03:52:33PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > I've a hard hard hard time believing this is something useful to do. I > mean by that argument you can just cause trouble everywhere by just > storing arbitrarily large stuff via sql. Did you read my last email until the end?

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

Hi, On 2018-02-18 08:48:37 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 08:52:11AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2018-02-17 11:39:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > pg_authid | rolpassword | text > > > > that seems not not to require one. > > You can craft SCRAM

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 08:52:11AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2018-02-17 11:39:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > pg_authid | rolpassword | text > > that seems not not to require one. You can craft SCRAM verifiers that make it fail, which can be easily done using this module:

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

Andres Freund writes: > On 2018-02-17 11:39:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> pg_aggregate| agginitval | text >> pg_aggregate| aggminitval | text > Seems like it should have a toast table, it's not too hard to imagine > some form of aggregate to

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 2018-02-17 11:39:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > BTW, I was wondering if it'd be a good idea to try to forestall future > oversights of this sort by adding a test query in, say, misc_sanity.sql. > Something like +many > relname | attname | atttypid >

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

Joe Conway writes: > Yes, exactly. I'm fine with not backpatching, just wanted to raise the > possibility. I will push later today to HEAD (with a catalog version bump). BTW, I was wondering if it'd be a good idea to try to forestall future oversights of this sort by adding a

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 02/16/2018 05:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway writes: >> On 02/16/2018 05:07 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >>> If problematic for < master users I think you'll have to restart cluster >>> with allow_system_table_mods, manually create/drop toasted column. IIRC >>> that should

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

Joe Conway writes: > On 02/16/2018 05:07 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >> On 2018-02-16 16:56:15 -0500, Joe Conway wrote: >>> Looking at the issue, the problem seems to be missing toast table for >>> pg_policy. Also attached is a one line patch. It isn't clear to me >>> whether

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

On 02/16/2018 05:07 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > On 2018-02-16 16:56:15 -0500, Joe Conway wrote: >> Looking at the issue, the problem seems to be missing toast table for >> pg_policy. Also attached is a one line patch. It isn't clear to me >> whether this is a candidate for backpatching. >

Re: missing toast table for pg_policy

Hi, On 2018-02-16 16:56:15 -0500, Joe Conway wrote: > Looking at the issue, the problem seems to be missing toast table for > pg_policy. Also attached is a one line patch. It isn't clear to me > whether this is a candidate for backpatching. Don't think it is - it'd not take effect on already