On 11/12/2014 03:28 PM, Ants Aasma wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 11:52 PM, Maeldron T. maeld...@gmail.com wrote:
As far as I remember (I can’t test it right now but I am 99% sure) promoting
the slave makes it impossible to connect the old master to the new one without
making a base_backup.
Great discussion.
Robert, I think you make a lot of very valid points, but philosophically
I am in pretty strong agreement with Andres here.
On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 14:29 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
So just refusing parallelism as soon as anything has taken an access
exclusive lock doesn't sound
On 13 November 2014 00:20, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
Isn't the real use-case here that if constraints were valid when you dumped
then we shouldn't have to *any* re-validate when we load? (Though, we'd have
to be careful of that with CHECK because that can call user code...)
It seems to me there are typos in the reference page for CREATE TABLE.
Please find attached a patch.
Thanks,
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_table.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_table.sgml
index 299cce8..ebcb885 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_table.sgml
+++
On 11/13/2014 12:45 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
It seems to me there are typos in the reference page for CREATE TABLE.
The structure of the sentence is a bit funky, but it seems correct to
me. If you google for should any, you'll get a bunch of pages
discussing similar sentences.
I would add a
On 12 October 2014 23:00, Tomas Vondra t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
It however seems to be working sufficiently well at this point, enough
to get some useful feedback. So here we go.
This looks interesting and useful.
What I'd like to check before a detailed review is that this has
sufficient
(2014/11/13 20:07), Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 11/13/2014 12:45 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
It seems to me there are typos in the reference page for CREATE TABLE.
The structure of the sentence is a bit funky, but it seems correct to
me. If you google for should any, you'll get a bunch of
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
That's already the situation today with all the logical replication
solutions. They *constantly* break in the field. Most commonly because
of DDL differences.
Right. And that's why it's cool that logical decoding can
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 2:26 AM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com wrote:
The current deadlock detector would see a dependency graph like:
A2 - B - A1
But with lock groups, it would see:
(A1 A2) - B - (A1 A2)
which is a cycle, and can be detected regardless of the synchronization
method
On 2014-11-13 07:17:32 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
That's already the situation today with all the logical replication
solutions. They *constantly* break in the field. Most commonly because
of DDL differences.
On 13/11/14 07:04, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Brief list of changes:
- the commit timestamp record now stores timestamp, lsn and nodeid
Now that not only the commit timestamp is stored, calling that commit
timestamp,
Dne 13 Listopad 2014, 12:31, Simon Riggs napsal(a):
On 12 October 2014 23:00, Tomas Vondra t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
It however seems to be working sufficiently well at this point, enough
to get some useful feedback. So here we go.
This looks interesting and useful.
What I'd like to check
On 9 November 2014 16:57, Steve Singer st...@ssinger.info wrote:
On 11/07/2014 07:07 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
The list of what is useful might be long, but we can't have everything
there as there are space constraints, and LSN is another 8 bytes and I still
want to have some bytes for storing
On 13/11/14 14:18, Simon Riggs wrote:
So in summary... the components are
* Commit LSN order is useful for applying changes - available by
logical decoding
* Commit timestamps and nodeid are useful for conflict resolution -
available from this patch
Both components have been designed in ways
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
In this case the
old master will request recovery from a point after the timeline
switch and the new master will reply with an error. So it is safe to
try re-adding a crashed master as a slave, but this might
On 2014-11-13 15:33:44 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Here's a new version, with big changes again to the record format. Have a
look at xlogrecord.h for the details, but in a nutshell:
1. The overall format is now: XLogRecord, per-block headers, header for main
data portion, per-block
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
has any business including. And if that weren't bad enough, it's
been included into utils/rel.h (relcache),
This is for the definition of RowSecurityDesc. I'm happy to move that
to a utils/rowsecurity.h
On 13.11.2014 14:11, Tomas Vondra wrote:
Dne 13 Listopad 2014, 12:31, Simon Riggs napsal(a):
On 12 October 2014 23:00, Tomas Vondra t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
It however seems to be working sufficiently well at this point, enough
to get some useful feedback. So here we go.
This looks interesting
I often get annoyed because psql is a bit too aggressive when it decides
whether to put output through the pager, and the only way to avoid this
is to turn the pager off (in which case your next query might dump many
thousands of lines to the screen). I'd like a way to be able to specify
a
On 13 November 2014 15:52, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
I often get annoyed because psql is a bit too aggressive when it decides
whether to put output through the pager, and the only way to avoid this is
to turn the pager off (in which case your next query might dump many
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
I often get annoyed because psql is a bit too aggressive when it decides
whether to put output through the pager, and the only way to avoid this
is to turn the pager off (in which case your next query might dump many
thousands of lines to the
On 2014-11-13 11:09:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
I often get annoyed because psql is a bit too aggressive when it decides
whether to put output through the pager, and the only way to avoid this
is to turn the pager off (in which case your next query
Hi,
There's a segfault when trying to dump global object from a running
7.4.27 with a pg_dumpall of version 9.3.5 but also 9.2.9.
$ pg_dumpall -g -h localhost -p 5474
column number -1 is out of range 0..12
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
The problem comes from the first columns of
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
But I think it won't work realistically. We have a *lot* of
infrastructure that refers to indexes using it's primary key. I don't
think we want to touch all those places to also disambiguate on some
other factor. All
On 11/13/2014 11:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
I often get annoyed because psql is a bit too aggressive when it decides
whether to put output through the pager, and the only way to avoid this
is to turn the pager off (in which case your next query might dump
Dne 13 Listopad 2014, 16:51, Katharina Büchse napsal(a):
On 13.11.2014 14:11, Tomas Vondra wrote:
The only place where I think this might work are the associative rules.
It's simple to specify rules like (ZIP code implies city) and we
could
even do some simple check against the data to see
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 05:14:47PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-11-13 11:09:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
I often get annoyed because psql is a bit too aggressive when it decides
whether to put output through the pager, and the only way to
Amit Kapila wrote:
This patch is in Ready for committer stage for more than 1.5 months.
I believe this is an important functionality such that without this tar
format of pg_basebackup is not usable on Windows. I feel this
will add a value to pg_basebackup utility and moreover the need
and
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Agreed- a node tree seems a bit too far to make this really work well..
But, I'm curious what you were thinking specifically?
I gave a pretty specific example in my email.
A node tree which
accepts an argument of the
Andrew Dunstan wrote
On 11/13/2014 11:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan lt;
andrew@
gt; writes:
I often get annoyed because psql is a bit too aggressive when it decides
whether to put output through the pager, and the only way to avoid this
is to turn the pager off (in which case your
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
I'm pretty puzzled by this. Other than our agree to disagree and
defer to committer position on the question of whether or not more
than
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
My point is: I am not sure I can be defined as a reviewer of this
patch or take any credit in this patch review knowing that the latest
version submitted is a simple rebase of the version I did my first
review on. Hence,
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
Attached patch moves the Levenshtein distance implementation into core.
Oops. Somehow managed to send a *.patch.swp file. :-)
Here is the actual
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 2:45 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
On 11/12/2014 10:06 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
hat *appears* to be happening is that the pause_at_recovery_target,
followed by the restart, on the replica causes it to advance one commit
on timeline 1. But *not all the time*;
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:54 AM, David G Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
Because I might be quite happy with 100 or 200 lines I can just scroll
in my terminal's scroll buffer, but want to use the pager for more than
that. This is useful especially if I want to scroll back and see
Michael Paquier wrote:
Hi all,
Currently all the row-level lock modes are described in the page for
SELECT query:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-ROWS
However, after browsing the documentation, I noticed in the page
describing all the explicit
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Committed. I changed varstr_leven() to varstr_levenshtein() because
abbrvs cn mk the code hrd to undstnd. And to grep.
Thanks. I'll produce a revision of patch 2/2 soon.
And I removed the
StaticAssertStmt you added,
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:54 AM, David G Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
Because I might be quite happy with 100 or 200 lines I can just scroll
in my terminal's scroll buffer, but want to use the pager for
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:54 AM, David G Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
Because I might be quite happy with 100 or 200 lines I
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
I often get annoyed because psql is a bit too aggressive when it decides
whether to put output through the pager, and the only way to avoid this is
to turn the pager off (in which case your next query might dump many
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 2014-11-13 11:09:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
I often get annoyed because psql is a bit too aggressive when it
decides
whether to put output through the pager, and the
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:03 PM, David Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:54 AM, David G Johnston
CREATE TABLE test (
foo text[],
EXCLUDE USING gist (foo WITH )
);
ERROR: data type text[] has no default operator class for access method gist
HINT: You must specify an operator class for the index or define a default
operator class for the data type.
It looks like exclusion
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com wrote:
If two backends both have an exclusive lock on the relation for a join
operation, that implies that they need to do their own synchronization,
because obviously the lock manager is not doing it for them.
This doesn't make
On 2014-08-15 14:53:45 +0200, Antonin Houska wrote:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/blu436-smtp12682d628f61ab9736099c3dc...@phx.gbl
recalls me that I also saw an assertion failure recently. Although I
wanted to isolate and report my issue when my vacation is over, this
report made me
Hi Steve,
On 2014-10-28 22:38:29 -0400, Steve Singer wrote:
On 10/28/2014 01:31 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-10-25 18:18:07 -0400, Steve Singer wrote:
My logical decoding plugin is occasionally getting this error
could not resolve cmin/cmax of catalog tuple
I get this when my output
Gilles Darold gilles.dar...@dalibo.com writes:
There's a segfault when trying to dump global object from a running
7.4.27 with a pg_dumpall of version 9.3.5 but also 9.2.9.
Hm ... I make a practice of checking pg_dump's backwards compatibility
from time to time, but I confess I've not tested
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com wrote:
If two backends both have an exclusive lock on the relation for a join
operation, that implies that they need to do their own synchronization,
because obviously the lock manager is
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
- Storage for new information
The new struct NameId stores an identifier which telling what it
logically is using the new enum NameIdTypes.
I think NameId is a bad name for this. My point is that NameId, as it
stands, might be a name for anything, not just a role;
On November 13, 2014 8:50:18 PM CET, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com
wrote:
If two backends both have an exclusive lock on the relation for a
join
operation, that implies that they need to
Discussion of my incomplete group locking patch seems to have
converged around two points: (1) Everybody agrees that undetected
deadlocks are unacceptable. (2) Nobody agrees with my proposal to
treat locks held by group members as mutually non-conflicting. As was
probably evident from the emails
franc...@hush.com wrote:
CREATE TABLE test (
foo text[],
EXCLUDE USING gist (foo WITH )
);
ERROR: data type text[] has no default operator class for access method
gist
HINT: You must specify an operator class for the index or define a default
operator class for the data type.
On 11/12/14 7:31 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Yes, it sucks. But it beats not being able to reindex a relation with a
primary key (referenced by a fkey) without waiting several hours by a
couple magnitudes. And that's the current situation.
That's fine, but we have, for better or worse, defined
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Ordering transactions in LSN order is very precisly the remit of the
existing logical decoding API. Any user that wishes to see a commits
in sequence can do so using that API. BDR already does this, as do
other users of
I was testing backwards compatibility of pg_dumpall just now, and was
somewhat astonished to notice the size of the output for the regression
database compared to what it was not too long ago:
-rw-rw-r--. 1 tgl tgl 4509135 Nov 13 16:19 dumpall.83
-rw-rw-r--. 1 tgl tgl 4514441 Nov 13 16:24
On 11/13/14 11:52 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Amit Kapila wrote:
This patch is in Ready for committer stage for more than 1.5 months.
I believe this is an important functionality such that without this tar
format of pg_basebackup is not usable on Windows. I feel this
will add a value to
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
I'm not fully on board with that premise. (Get a better tar tool.
Submit a patch.)
Noah was unable to find one that works:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20130801161519.ga334...@tornado.leadboat.com
If most tar
On November 13, 2014 10:23:41 PM CET, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 11/12/14 7:31 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Yes, it sucks. But it beats not being able to reindex a relation with
a
primary key (referenced by a fkey) without waiting several hours by a
couple magnitudes. And that's the
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com wrote:
If two backends both have an exclusive lock on the relation for a join
operation, that implies that they need to do their own synchronization,
On 11/11/2014 06:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-11-03 21:58:51 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
PS. I find the name ReplicationSlotOnDiskDynamicSize confusing, as it is
in fact a fixed size struct. I gather it's expected that the size of that
part might change across versions, but by that
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 2:47 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Thanks, I applied it to master and 9.4 after some slight
editorialization.
Thanks.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
Gilles Darold gilles.dar...@dalibo.com writes:
In the same query there is another bug introduced by commit 491c029
that add Row-Level Security Policies. Current master code has a broken
pg_dumpall when trying to dump from a backend lower than 8.1.
Actually, I think that code is not just
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Gilles Darold gilles.dar...@dalibo.com writes:
In the same query there is another bug introduced by commit 491c029
that add Row-Level Security Policies. Current master code has a broken
pg_dumpall when trying to dump from a backend lower than 8.1.
On 2014-11-14 00:04:52 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 11/11/2014 06:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-11-03 21:58:51 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
PS. I find the name ReplicationSlotOnDiskDynamicSize confusing, as it is
in fact a fixed size struct. I gather it's expected that the
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
I'm happy to fix it either way (and fix it for 8.1, and back to.. what?
Postgres95?)
Err. That might have come off poorly- I didn't mean that sarcastically
but was really wondering how far back you test (or how far back we
feel pg_dumpall needs to
On 2014-11-13 18:00:45 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
I'm happy to fix it either way (and fix it for 8.1, and back to.. what?
Postgres95?)
Err. That might have come off poorly- I didn't mean that sarcastically
but was really wondering how far back
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2014-11-13 18:00:45 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Err. That might have come off poorly- I didn't mean that sarcastically
but was really wondering how far back you test (or how far back we
feel pg_dumpall needs to work against..).
pg_dump
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Actually, I think that code is not just under-tested but poorly thought
out. It will dump ALL roles from a pre-9.5 database with NOBYPASSRLS;
even superusers.
Superusers are always considered to have it,
On 2014-11-13 18:24:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2014-11-13 18:00:45 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Err. That might have come off poorly- I didn't mean that sarcastically
but was really wondering how far back you test (or how far back we
feel
On 13 November 2014 21:24, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Ordering transactions in LSN order is very precisly the remit of the
existing logical decoding API. Any user that wishes to see a commits
in sequence
On 12 November 2014 00:54, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm going to aim for the simpler:
Hash Aggregate
- Parallel Seq Scan
Workers: 4
Yeah, I know that won't perform as well as what you're proposing, but
I'm fairly sure it's simpler.
Simple is best, so +1.
--
Simon
On 12 November 2014 07:54, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
This plan type is widely used in reporting queries, so will hit the
mainline of BI applications and many Mat View creations.
This will allow SELECT
On 12 November 2014 00:54, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 3:29 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
* only functions marked as CONTAINS NO SQL
We don't really know what proisparallel is, but we do know what
CONTAINS NO SQL means and can easily check
On 11/13/14 5:07 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 13 November 2014 00:20, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
Isn't the real use-case here that if constraints were valid when you dumped
then we shouldn't have to *any* re-validate when we load? (Though, we'd have
to be careful of that with
Sam Saffron sam.saff...@gmail.com writes:
I have hit a rather odd issue with prepared queries on both pg 9.3 and 9.4
beta.
I have this table (copy at http://samsaffron.com/testing.db.gz) with a
very odd performance profile:
Interesting case. The issue seems to be that your statistics look
Tom Lane-2 wrote
In the meantime, I assume that your real data contains a small percentage
of values other than these two? If so, maybe cranking up the statistics
target would help. If the planner knows that there are more than two
values in the column, I think it would be less optimistic
Limit (cost= rows=20 width=175) (actual time= rows=20 loops=1)
- Sort (cost= rows=568733 width=175) (actual time=
rows=20 loops=1)
Sort Method: top-N heapsort
The Sort estimate shows 568733 rows, whereas the actual rows are 20.
Both are correct, in a way.
The node
David G Johnston david.g.johns...@gmail.com writes:
Tom Lane-2 wrote
In the meantime, I assume that your real data contains a small percentage
of values other than these two? If so, maybe cranking up the statistics
target would help. If the planner knows that there are more than two
values
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Limit (cost= rows=20 width=175) (actual time= rows=20 loops=1)
- Sort (cost= rows=568733 width=175) (actual time=
rows=20 loops=1)
Sort Method: top-N heapsort
The Sort estimate shows 568733 rows, whereas the actual rows
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 12 November 2014 07:54, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
This plan type is widely used in reporting queries, so will hit the
On 11/13/2014 03:38 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
configure is a generated file. If your patch touches it but not
configure.in, there is a problem.
Thanks for pointing it out, I have now fixed it.
--
Andreas Karlsson
diff --git a/configure b/configure
new file mode 100755
index c4f70e8..bb801b4
On 11/12/14 10:59 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
No, I really don't want to do that. When trying to see whether logical
replication started that's imo quite an importantdetail. Especially when
first seing
ereport(LOG,
(errmsg(logical decoding found initial
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
David G Johnston david.g.johns...@gmail.com writes:
Tom Lane-2 wrote
In the meantime, I assume that your real data contains a small
percentage
of values other than these two? If so, maybe cranking up the statistics
On 12 November 2014 07:54, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Simon Riggs
si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
This plan type is widely used in reporting queries, so will hit
the
mainline of BI applications and many
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
What's bothering me is that I see this in pg_dumpall output from a 9.4
or earlier database:
ALTER ROLE postgres WITH SUPERUSER INHERIT CREATEROLE CREATEDB LOGIN
REPLICATION NOBYPASSRLS;
Ah, yeah, good point.
That means that if you do a pg_upgrade
On 11/13/14 7:57 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
On 11/13/2014 03:38 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
configure is a generated file. If your patch touches it but not
configure.in, there is a problem.
Thanks for pointing it out, I have now fixed it.
There is something odd about your patch. I claims
David Johnston david.g.johns...@gmail.com writes:
âWhile planner hints comes to mind...on the SQL side can we extend the
PREPARE command with two additional keywords?â
âPREPARE
name [ ( data_type [, ...] ) ] [
[NO] GENERIC
â] â
âAS statement
Don't really see the point. The
Tom Lane-2 wrote
Simon Riggs lt;
simon@
gt; writes:
Limit (cost= rows=20 width=175) (actual time= rows=20 loops=1)
- Sort (cost= rows=568733 width=175) (actual time=
rows=20 loops=1)
Sort Method: top-N heapsort
The Sort estimate shows 568733 rows, whereas
David G Johnston david.g.johns...@gmail.com writes:
Tom Lane-2 wrote
[ shrug... ] The estimated value is the planner's estimate of what would
happen *if you ran the node to completion*, which in practice doesn't
happen because of the LIMIT.
I don't see how a sort node cannot run to
On 11/12/14 1:04 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
I suggest:
1. Logical decoding will begin using saved snapshot.
2. Transaction ID %u finished; no more running transactions.
3. There are no running transactions.
I went with that. Thank you.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 2014-11-13 21:03:57 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 11/12/14 1:04 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
I suggest:
1. Logical decoding will begin using saved snapshot.
2. Transaction ID %u finished; no more running transactions.
3. There are no running transactions.
I went with that. Thank
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
but
with declarative partitioning, I expect us to eventually be able to
eliminate complete partitions from consideration on both sides of a
partition-table join
Tom,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Well, if you *only* move RowSecurityDesc and not RowSecurityPolicy,
okay, but that seems a bit useless/inconsistent if I'm reading it
right that RowSecurityDesc contains a List of RowSecurityPolicy structs.
Yes, good point.
What seems possibly
On 11/13/2014 02:44 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
H
I've pushed a fix for a bug that could possibly also cause
this. Although it'd be odd that it always hits the user catalog
table. Except if your tests mostly modify the slony tables, but do not
do much DDL otherwise?
The test I was running
Thank you so much!
So to recap the general way to reproduce this issue is:
create table products(id int primary key, type varchar);
insert into products select generate_series(1,1), 'aaa';
insert into products select generate_series(10001,2), 'bbb';
create index idx on products(type);
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 3:03 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 11/13/14 11:52 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Amit Kapila wrote:
This patch is in Ready for committer stage for more than 1.5 months.
I believe this is an important functionality such that without this tar
format of
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:37 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 3:03 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 11/13/14 11:52 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Amit Kapila wrote:
This patch is in Ready for committer stage for more than 1.5 months.
I
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 08:24:36PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
What's bothering me is that I see this in pg_dumpall output from a 9.4
or earlier database:
ALTER ROLE postgres WITH SUPERUSER INHERIT CREATEROLE CREATEDB LOGIN
REPLICATION
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Antonin Houska a...@cybertec.at wrote:
Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Antonin Houska a...@cybertec.at wrote:
While looking at
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 08:24:36PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Agreed. I'll take care of both and we'll make sure the new role
attributes being added will do the same for upgrades also.
That would make pg_dumpall less faithful for every role other than
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
