2014-12-18 19:35 GMT+07:00 Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
I was thinking something like this, added just after that para:
warning
para
While the actual arguments to the function remain
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com wrote:
Clearly, all the nodes other than the local one need to use 2PC. I am
unconvinced that the local node must write a 2PC state file only to
turn around and remove it again almost immediately thereafter.
The key point is
Would anyone object to modifying configure.in like this:
if test $GCC = yes -a $ICC = no; then
- CFLAGS=$CFLAGS -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
+ CFLAGS=-Wall $CFLAGS -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
# These work in some but not all gcc versions
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 4:55 PM, John Gorman johngorm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 6:01 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net
wrote:
So, for my 2c, I've long expected us to parallelize at the
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 4:55 PM, John Gorman johngorm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 6:01 AM, Stephen Frost
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 3:36 AM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
My understanding is that once you get a successful PREPARE that should mean
that it's basically impossible for the transaction to fail to commit. If
that's not the case, I fail to see how you can get any decent
On 01/13/2015 07:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
It is, but FDWs are not at risk here: they merely reference ExplainStates
that were allocated by core backend code. So as long as we add the new
field at the end it's not a problem for them. Problematic usage would be
like what auto_explain does:
On 01/13/2015 06:04 PM, Timmer, Marius wrote:
-malloc() (StringInfo is used as suggested now).
There really shouldn't be any snprintf() calls in the patch, when
StringInfo is used correctly...
@@ -1187,6 +1187,7 @@ explain (verbose, costs off) select * from matest0 order
by 1-id;
Sort
On 01/13/2015 12:11 PM, Vladimir Borodin wrote:
05 янв. 2015 г., в 18:15, Vladimir Borodin r...@simply.name написал(а):
Hi all.
I have a simple script for planned switchover of PostgreSQL (9.3 and 9.4)
master to one of its replicas. This script checks a lot of things before doing
it and
Hi,
we removed
-malloc() (StringInfo is used as suggested now).
-leftover commented out code
-the splitting of existing declaration and initialization in show_group_keys().
Missing tests and documentation are WIP and will follow with the next patch
version.
Best regards
Marius
---
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
A difficulty with either your patch or my idea is that they require adding
another field to ExplainState, which is an ABI break for any third-party
code that might be declaring variables of that struct type. That's fine
for HEAD
Tom Lane wrote:
A difficulty with either your patch or my idea is that they require adding
another field to ExplainState, which is an ABI break for any third-party
code that might be declaring variables of that struct type. That's fine
for HEAD but would be risky to back-patch. Any thoughts
Hi,
Currently the combination from $subject fails for me with could not
read from backend variables file
The origin for that problem seems to be b94ce6e80 which moved
RemovePgTempFiles() to after SysLogger_Start(). Unless the syslogger
starts up very quickly RemovePgTempFiles() will have
Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
On 01/13/2015 07:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
In hindsight, that's a bad API and we should change it to something like
ExplainState *es = NewExplainState();
so that the sizeof the struct isn't embedded in extension code. But we
definitely can't do
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 05:16:40PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Alright, here's an updated patch which doesn't return any detail if no
values are visible or if only a partial key is visible.
I browsed this patch. There's been no mention of foreign key constraints, but
ri_ReportViolation()
Hi all,
I noticed that SET STATISTICS was not in a literal block in alter_table.sgml:
para
- SET STATISTICS acquires a literalSHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE/literal lock.
+ literalSET STATISTICS/literal acquires a
+ literalSHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE/literal lock.
/para
That's a
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Hi,
Currently the combination from $subject fails for me with could not
read from backend variables file
The origin for that problem seems to be b94ce6e80 which moved
RemovePgTempFiles() to after
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-01-13 11:10:06 -0800, Magnus Hagander wrote:
EXEC_BACKEND on Windows doesn't actually use a tempfile though, so I'm
guessing that's it.
Ah! Then this really is fairly harmless. Will fix and backpatch anyway,
but the number of affected
On 2015-01-13 11:10:06 -0800, Magnus Hagander wrote:
EXEC_BACKEND on Windows doesn't actually use a tempfile though, so I'm
guessing that's it.
Ah! Then this really is fairly harmless. Will fix and backpatch anyway,
but the number of affected people should be pretty much zero.
Greetings,
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I don't remember seeing _bt_moveright() or _bt_compare() figuring so
prominently, where _bt_binsrch() is nowhere to be seen. I can't see a
reference to _bt_binsrch() in either profile.
Well, we do a _bt_moveright
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
Some more information what's happening:
This is a ghetto logical replication engine that migrates data from
sql sever to postgres, consolidating a sharded database into a single
set of tables (of which there are only
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'm not convinced that Peter is barking up the right tree. I'm noticing
that the profiles seem rather skewed towards parser/planner work; so I
suspect the contention is probably on access to system catalogs. No
idea exactly
I wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
But do we really need to backpatch any of this?
Alexey's example consumes only a couple hundred MB in 9.2, vs about 7GB
peak in 9.3 and up. That seems like a pretty nasty regression.
I did a bit more measurement of the time and
On 2015-01-13 20:21:55 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-01-13 11:10:06 -0800, Magnus Hagander wrote:
EXEC_BACKEND on Windows doesn't actually use a tempfile though, so I'm
guessing that's it.
Ah! Then this really is fairly harmless. Will fix and backpatch anyway,
but the number of
On 13/01/15 13:24, Tomas Vondra wrote:
On 12.1.2015 22:33, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 15/12/14 11:36, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 10/12/14 03:33, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 24/11/14 12:16, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
About the rough edges:
- The AlterSequence is not prettiest code around as we now have to
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 04:41:16PM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
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
Hi,
I just noticed that authentication_timeout is ineffective for
replication=true type connections. That's because walsender doesn't
register a SIGINT handler and authentication_timeout relies on having
one.
There's no problem with reading the initial startup packet
On 13 January 2015 at 13:50, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
* Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 12 January 2015 at 22:16, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Alright, here's an updated patch which doesn't return any detail if no
values are visible or if only a
On 13.01.2015 16:47, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Hmm, something like the attached? Seems reasonable...
- Heikki
yes, i have tested something like this, it stopped eating memory
Just one small notice to the patch you attached: maybe it would be more
safe to switch to oldcxt before calling
05 янв. 2015 г., в 18:15, Vladimir Borodin r...@simply.name написал(а):
Hi all.
I have a simple script for planned switchover of PostgreSQL (9.3 and 9.4)
master to one of its replicas. This script checks a lot of things before
doing it and one of them is that all data from master has
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
This looks like a false positive to me. PQgetCopyData() will only return a
buffer if its return value is 0
Right. Sorry for the noise.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 12 January 2015 at 15:57, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:31 AM, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd be keen to know what people's thoughts are about the
nodeAlternativePlan
only surviving until the plan is initialised.
I find it scary,
Il 08/01/15 20:18, Jim Nasby ha scritto:
On 1/7/15, 3:50 AM, Marco Nenciarini wrote:
The current implementation tracks only heap LSN. It currently does not
track any kind of indexes, but this can be easily added later.
Would it make sense to do this at a buffer level, instead of at the heap
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 6:01 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
So, for my 2c, I've long expected us to parallelize at the relation-file
level for these kinds of operations. This goes back to my other
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
You'll need to use (void) pushJsonbValue(...), otherwise you'll just get a
different warning. See commit c8315930.
Oh, I see. So this portion in contrib/ has been visibly missing.
Attached is a new patch.
--
On 2015-01-12 00:40:50 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
Fixed in what I've since pushed (as Heikki basically was ok with the
patch sent a couple months back, modulo some fixes)...
I'd not actually pushed that patch... I had pushed some patches
(barriers, atomics), but had decided to hold off on
On 01/13/2015 01:09 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
You'll need to use (void) pushJsonbValue(...), otherwise you'll just get a
different warning. See commit c8315930.
Oh, I see. So this portion in contrib/ has been
On 01/13/2015 02:08 PM, Alexey Bashtanov wrote:
I found that EXPLAIN command takes very much memory to execute when huge
unions are used.
For example the following sql
-- begin sql
create table t (a000 int, a001 int, ... a099 int);
explain select * from (
select a001 a from t
union
Hi Marco,
could you please send an updated version the patch against the current
HEAD in order to facilitate reviewers?
Thanks,
Gabriele
--
Gabriele Bartolini - 2ndQuadrant Italia - Managing Director
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
gabriele.bartol...@2ndquadrant.it |
Hello!
I found that EXPLAIN command takes very much memory to execute when huge
unions are used.
For example the following sql
-- begin sql
create table t (a000 int, a001 int, ... a099 int);
explain select * from (
select a001 a from t
union all
select a001 a from t
union all
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 7:25 AM, John Gorman johngorm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 6:01 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net
wrote:
So, for my 2c, I've long expected us to parallelize at the
On 12.1.2015 22:33, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 15/12/14 11:36, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 10/12/14 03:33, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 24/11/14 12:16, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
About the rough edges:
- The AlterSequence is not prettiest code around as we now have to
create new relation when sequence AM
Hello. This is a version 3 patch.
- PgFdwConnState is removed
- PgFdwConn is isolated as a separate module.
- State transition was simplicated, I think.
- Comment about multiple scans on a connection is added.
- The issue of PREPARE is not addressed yet.
- It is to show how the new style
On 12 January 2015 at 22:16, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Alright, here's an updated patch which doesn't return any detail if no
values are visible or if only a partial key is visible.
Please take a look. I'm not thrilled with simply returning an empty
string and then checking
* Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 12 January 2015 at 22:16, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Alright, here's an updated patch which doesn't return any detail if no
values are visible or if only a partial key is visible.
Please take a look. I'm not thrilled with
Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
On 01/13/2015 02:08 PM, Alexey Bashtanov wrote:
By varying the parameters and reading source code I determined that
memory usage linearly depends on (plan nodes count)*(overall columns
count), thus it quadratically depends on number of tables
I wrote:
Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com writes:
Attached is a patch adding the following set of functions for frontend
and backends returning NULL instead of reporting ERROR when allocation
fails:
- palloc_safe
- palloc0_safe
- repalloc_safe
Unimpressed with this naming
On 11/30/14 11:45 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
The API break isn't a big issue imo. The net effect would be that eg
hstore 9.3.6 wouldn't work against a 9.3.5 server. We do that sort of
thing *all the time* --- at least twice in the past year, according to
a quick scan of the commit logs. If you
Il 13/01/15 12:53, Gabriele Bartolini ha scritto:
Hi Marco,
could you please send an updated version the patch against the current
HEAD in order to facilitate reviewers?
Here is the updated patch for incremental file based backup.
It is based on the current HEAD.
I'm now working to the
* Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote:
One improvement we could trivially make is to only do this for
multi-column indexes. If there is only one column there is no danger
of information leakage, right?
That's an interesting thought. If there's only one column then to have
a conflict
I wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Hmm, something like the attached? Seems reasonable...
This looks pretty unsafe to me: it assumes, without much justification,
that there is no memory allocated during show_expression() that will be
needed later.
I suspect the
On my workstation today (running vanilla 9.4.0) I was testing some new
code that does aggressive parallel loading to a couple of tables. It
ran ok several dozen times and froze up with no external trigger.
There were at most 8 active backends that were stuck (the loader is
threaded to a cap) --
Hi,
On 2015-01-13 16:29:51 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On my workstation today (running vanilla 9.4.0) I was testing some new
code that does aggressive parallel loading to a couple of tables. It
ran ok several dozen times and froze up with no external trigger.
There were at most 8 active
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Hi,
On 2015-01-13 16:29:51 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On my workstation today (running vanilla 9.4.0) I was testing some new
code that does aggressive parallel loading to a couple of tables. It
ran ok several
On 1/7/15 3:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
Currently, when you unpack a tarred basebackup with tablespaces, the
symlinks will tell you whether you have unpacked the tablespace tars at
the right place. Otherwise, how do you
There are two ways in which access control for replication connections
is separate:
- replication pseudo-database in pg_hba.conf
- replication role attribute
If someone has a restrictive setup for replication and pg_basebackup,
and then pg_rewind enters, they will have to
- add a line to
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On my workstation today (running vanilla 9.4.0) I was testing some new
code that does aggressive parallel loading to a couple of tables.
Could you give more details, please? For example, I'd like to see
representative
On 2015-01-13 15:17:15 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I'm inclined to think that this is a livelock, and so the problem
isn't evident from the structure of the B-Tree, but it can't hurt to
check.
My guess is rather that it's contention on the freelist lock via
StrategyGetBuffer's. I've seen
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2015-01-13 15:17:15 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I'm inclined to think that this is a livelock, and so the problem
isn't evident from the structure of the B-Tree, but it can't hurt to
check.
My guess is rather
Tom Lane writes:
[blah]
(This is another reason for _safe not being the mot juste :-()
My wording was definitely incorrect but I sure you got it: I should
have said safe on error. noerror or error_safe would are definitely
more correct.
In that light, I'm not really convinced that there's a
On 2015-01-13 17:39:09 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2015-01-13 15:17:15 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I'm inclined to think that this is a livelock, and so the problem
isn't evident from the structure of the
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
My guess is rather that it's contention on the freelist lock via
StrategyGetBuffer's. I've seen profiles like this due to exactly that
before - and it fits to parallel loading quite well.
I'm not saying you're wrong,
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
My guess is rather that it's contention on the freelist lock via
StrategyGetBuffer's. I've seen profiles like this due to exactly that
before -
On 2015-01-13 15:49:33 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
My guess is rather that it's contention on the freelist lock via
StrategyGetBuffer's. I've seen profiles like this due to exactly that
before - and it fits to
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't remember seeing _bt_moveright() or _bt_compare() figuring so
prominently, where _bt_binsrch() is nowhere to be seen. I can't see a
reference to _bt_binsrch() in either profile.
hm, this is hand compiled now, I
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't remember seeing _bt_moveright() or _bt_compare() figuring so
prominently, where _bt_binsrch() is nowhere to be seen. I can't see a
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2015-01-13 17:39:09 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 2015-01-13 15:17:15 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I'm inclined to think that this
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
In case it isn't clear, I think that the proximate cause here may well
be either one (or both) of commits
efada2b8e920adfdf7418862e939925d2acd1b89 and/or
On 2015-01-13 19:05:10 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
In case it isn't clear, I think that the proximate cause here may well
be either one (or both) of commits
69 matches
Mail list logo
