On Fri, January 9, 2015 20:15, David Fetter wrote:
[psql_fix_uri_service_003.patch]
Applies on master; the feature (switching services) works well but a \c without
any parameters produces a segfault:
(centos 6.6, 4.9.2, 64-bit)
$ echo -en $PGSERVICEFILE\n$PGSERVICE\n$PGPORT\n
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 9:49 PM, Rahila Syed rahilasyed...@gmail.com wrote:
So this test can be used to evaluate how shorter records influence
performance since the master waits for flush confirmation from the
standby, right?
Yes. This test can help measure performance improvement due to reduced
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 2:27 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
so some memory is allocated, and has to be freed. I looked at avoiding
the call to gen_db_file_maps() for old_db-rel_arr.nrels == 0, but there
are checks in there comparing the old/new relation counts, so it can't
be
On 01/09/2015 02:15 PM, David Fetter wrote:
Some C cleanups...
Not quite enough cleanup. As I told you on IRC, the only addition to
common.h should be the declaration of recognized_connection_string.
These do not belong there (they belong in common.c):
+static const char
On 01/10/2015 09:32 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-01-10 09:16:07 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
+static const char uri_designator[] = postgresql://;
+static const char short_uri_designator[] = postgres://;
These declarations in common.h would cause a separate instance of these
pieces
On 2014-09-04 08:49:22 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I'm slightly worried about the added overhead due to the latch code. In
my implementation I only use latches after a nonblocking read, but
still. Every
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
On 1/8/15, 12:00 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
The key point is that the distributed transaction data must be
flagged as needing to commit rather than roll back between the
prepare phase and the final commit. If you try to
On 2015-01-10 09:49:52 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Save static inline functions, that is.
Yeah, but not normally data items. (I did say in general). As a general
rule for novice C programmers I think my rule of thumb is reasonable.
Agreed. I just tried to preempt somebody grepping for static
Dean,
* Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 9 January 2015 at 20:26, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Where this leaves me, at least, is feeling like we should always apply
the INSERT WITH CHECK policy, then if there is a conflict, check the
UPDATE USING policy and
On 9 January 2015 at 20:26, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Where this leaves me, at least, is feeling like we should always apply
the INSERT WITH CHECK policy, then if there is a conflict, check the
UPDATE USING policy and throw an error if the row isn't visible but
otherwise perform
On 2015-01-10 09:16:07 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
+static const char uri_designator[] = postgresql://;
+static const char short_uri_designator[] = postgres://;
These declarations in common.h would cause a separate instance of these
pieces of storage to occur in every object file
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 06:57:02PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Hmm ... actually, I'll bet it's not $HOME that's at issue, but the name
of the user. Commit a4c8f14364c27508233f8a31ac4b10a4c90235a9 turned
failure of pg_fe_getauthname() into a hard connection
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 06:57:02PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Commit a4c8f14364c27508233f8a31ac4b10a4c90235a9 turned
failure of pg_fe_getauthname() into a hard connection failure, whereas
previously it was harmless as long as the caller provided a username.
I wonder if we shouldn't just revert
Re: Tom Lane 2015-01-10 22432.1420915...@sss.pgh.pa.us
So what I propose we do with this is patch HEAD and 9.4 only.
We need to do *something* in 9.4 to address Christoph's complaint, and
that branch is new enough that we can probably get away with changing
officially-unsupported APIs. The
I've not tried to build HEAD on my HPPA dinosaur for awhile, but I did
just now, and I am presented with boatloads of this:
../../../src/include/storage/s_lock.h:759: warning: `S_UNLOCK' redefined
../../../src/include/storage/s_lock.h:679: warning: this is the location of the
previous definition
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Given you got the error above, you used gcc.
Right.
Have you used non-gcc
compiler on hppa recently? I seem to recall you mentioning that that
doesn't work sanely anymore? If so, perhaps we can just remove the !gcc
variant?
I'll try that shortly
While looking at fe-auth.c I noticed quite a few places that weren't
bothering to make error messages localizable (ie, missing libpq_gettext
calls), and/or were failing to add a trailing newline as expected in
libpq error messages. Perhaps these are intentional but I doubt it.
Most of the
Christoph Berg c...@df7cb.de writes:
Re: Tom Lane 2015-01-10 22432.1420915...@sss.pgh.pa.us
So what I propose we do with this is patch HEAD and 9.4 only.
We need to do *something* in 9.4 to address Christoph's complaint, and
that branch is new enough that we can probably get away with changing
* Amit Kapila (amit.kapil...@gmail.com) wrote:
At this moment if we can ensure that parallel plan should not be selected
for cases where it will perform poorly is more than enough considering
we have lots of other work left to even make any parallel operation work.
The problem with this
One other point here: I realized while testing my patch that it's actually
impossible to provoke the failure mode Christoph is unhappy about in psql.
You can only see it in an application that uses PQsetdb/PQsetdbLogin,
which of course psql doesn't anymore. The reason is that in the PQconnect
On 10 January 2015 at 15:12, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
NOTE: If we do change RLS CHECKs to be executed prior to modifying any
data, that's potentially a change that could be made independently of
the UPSERT patch. We should also probably then stop referring to them
as WITH CHECK
On 2015-01-10 16:09:42 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I've not tried to build HEAD on my HPPA dinosaur for awhile, but I did
just now, and I am presented with boatloads of this:
../../../src/include/storage/s_lock.h:759: warning: `S_UNLOCK' redefined
../../../src/include/storage/s_lock.h:679:
On 2015-01-10 17:58:10 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Given you got the error above, you used gcc. Have you used non-gcc
compiler on hppa recently? I seem to recall you mentioning that that
doesn't work sanely anymore? If so, perhaps we can just remove
Hi,
On 2015-01-09 04:59:56 +0100, Vladimir Koković wrote:
Thanks Andres, i686 check-world passed with your
atomic-uint64-alignment.patch.
Thanks for the report and testing! I've pushed the fix.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
On 2015-01-10 18:40:58 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-01-11 00:06:41 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
Ick, that one is my failure.
Actually. It looks like I only translated the logic from barrier.h 1:1
and it already was broken there. Hm, it looks
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 09:30:57AM +0100, Erik Rijkers wrote:
On Fri, January 9, 2015 20:15, David Fetter wrote:
[psql_fix_uri_service_003.patch]
Applies on master; the feature (switching services) works well but a \c
without any parameters produces a segfault:
(centos 6.6, 4.9.2,
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
The parameters sound reasonable but I'm a bit worried about the way
you're describing the implementation. Specifically this comment:
Cost of starting up parallel workers with default value as 1000.0
multiplied by number
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 02:02:54PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Not entirely sure what to do about this, but I predict this won't be
the last complaint unless we find some way to improve test coverage
in this area. Or perhaps we could turn PQsetdbLogin into a
***very*** thin wrapper around
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Given you got the error above, you used gcc. Have you used non-gcc
compiler on hppa recently? I seem to recall you mentioning that that
doesn't work sanely anymore? If so, perhaps we can just remove the !gcc
variant?
It still compiles, modulo some
On 2015-01-11 00:06:41 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-01-10 17:58:10 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Given you got the error above, you used gcc. Have you used non-gcc
compiler on hppa recently? I seem to recall you mentioning that that
doesn't
Hi,
I made a quick review for your patch, but I would like to see someone
who was involved in the BRIN work comment on Emre's design issues. I
will try to answer them as best as I can below.
I think minimax indexes on range types seems very useful, and inet/cidr
too. I have no idea about
On 1/9/15, 8:51 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
2015-01-10 9:56 GMT+09:00 Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com:
On 1/9/15, 6:54 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 1/9/15, 6:44 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
Yep, I had a same impression when I looked at the code first time,
however, it is defined as below. Not a
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:42 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Are we sure that in such cases we will consume work_mem during
execution? In cases of parallel_workers we are sure to an extent
that if we reserve the workers then we will use it during execution.
Nonetheless, I have
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Yeah, if we come up with a plan for X workers and end up not being able
to spawn that many then I could see that being worth a warning or notice
or something. Not sure what EXPLAIN has to do anything with it..
That seems
On 01/11/2015 02:36 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
a) Afaics only __int128/unsigned __int128 is defined. See
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/_005f_005fint128.html
Both GCC and Clang defines both of them. Which you use seems to just be
a matter of preference.
b) I'm doubtful that
On 1/10/15, 7:11 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
If we had an independent transaction coordinator then I agree with you
Kevin. I think Robert is proposing that if we are controlling one of the
nodes that's participating as well as coordinating the overall transaction
that we can take some shortcuts.
Hi,
+# Check if platform support gcc style 128-bit integers.
+AC_CHECK_TYPES([__int128_t, __uint128_t], [], [], [])
Hm, I'm not sure that's sufficent. Three things:
a) Afaics only __int128/unsigned __int128 is defined. See
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/_005f_005fint128.html
b) I'm
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:42 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
2. To enable two types of shared memory queue's (error queue and
tuple queue), we need to ensure that we switch to appropriate queue
during
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-01-11 00:06:41 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
Ick, that one is my failure.
Actually. It looks like I only translated the logic from barrier.h 1:1
and it already was broken there. Hm, it looks like the current code
essentially is from
2015-01-11 10:40 GMT+09:00 Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com:
On 1/9/15, 8:51 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
2015-01-10 9:56 GMT+09:00 Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com:
On 1/9/15, 6:54 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 1/9/15, 6:44 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
Yep, I had a same impression when I looked
40 matches
Mail list logo
