On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Michael Paquier writes:
Thanks for the clarifications and the review. Attached is a new set.
I've reviewed and pushed the 0001 patch (you missed a few things
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
Attached are 3 more patches to improve the coverage (being careful
this time with calls of offsetof and sizeof...):
- 0001 covers varlena in c.h
- 0002 covers HeapTupleHeaderData and MinimalTupleData, with things
changed in code paths
Hello,
At Thu, 19 Feb 2015 19:22:21 +0900, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote
in cahgqgwglflafrcycuikkvefnaoel448tlsj9opsvb17v3fo...@mail.gmail.com
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote:
Hello, this is the last patch for
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Alexander Kukushkin cyberd...@gmail.com wrote:
It's really crazy to keep so many (hundreds) connections to the database and
it would be much better to have something like pgbouncer in front of
postgres.
Right now it's not possible, because pgbouncer is not
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 8:29 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Michael Paquier
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 8:29 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
-
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Kevin Grittner (kgri...@ymail.com) wrote:
With the two patches I submitted, bloat stabilized at less than 5%
except for some btree indexes which followed pattern of inserting
at the end and deleting most (but not all) of the entries over
time. I've
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 2015-02-18 16:59:26 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
There could be some cases where it could be beneficial for worker
to process a sub-tree, but I think there will be more cases where
it will just work on a part of
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 09:35:02PM -0500, David Steele wrote:
On 2/19/15 11:57 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 09:26:11PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
3. Check that the replica is not very lagged. If it is, wait for
traffic to die down and for it to catch up.
Now that
Jan de Visser j...@de-visser.net writes:
I can have a crack at this. What's the process? Do I add it to a CF once I
have a patch, or do I do that beforehand?
The CF process is for reviewing things, so until you have either a patch
or a design sketch you want feedback on, there's no need for a
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-02-15 12:54:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
BTW, the precedent of PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY would suggest calling
this one PG_FORCE_NOT_NULL, or at least using underscores for word
breaks in whatever we end up calling it.
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
We could check if there is a = or = as a child of another general
operator. That is already quite unlikely to begin with (except for the
obvious common case I am forgetting right now). We could even do this
in an external module with a hook. Or to be
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
This seems to happen because ordered_set_startup() calls
tuplesort_begin_datum() when (use_tuples == true), which only sets
'onlyKey' and leaves (sortKeys == NULL). So 'mergeruns' fails because it
does not
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
Then I refuse to believe that the livelock hazard exists, without the
pre-check. If you have a livelock scenario in mind, it really shouldn't be
that difficult to write down the list of steps.
I just meant
Tomas Vondra tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I share the view that this would be very valuable, but the scope
far exceeds what can be done within a single GSoC project. But
maybe we could split that into multiple pieces, and Eric would
implement only the first piece?
For example the
On 20.2.2015 22:45, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Oracle, MS SQL Server, Sybase ASE, and IBM DB2 all have this. (There
may be others.) In essence they treat an MV a bit like an index, as
something you can create to speed up an existing query without
rewriting it. It would certainly be nice to have
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
Hello,
We have a combination of 9.3 and 9.4 databases used for logging of data.
We do not need a strong durability guarantee, meaning it is ok if on crash a
minute or two of data is lost from our logs. (This is just
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 2:11 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2015-02-18 16:35:14 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
Andres pointed out that the INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE patch
doesn't work well with logical decoding.
Just to make that clear: I didn't actually test it, but it
On 20.2.2015 21:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 2/20/15 3:09 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
On 20.2.2015 21:01, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Is there a case where the combining function is different from the
transition function, other than for count?
It's different in all the cases when the aggregate
On 02/20/2015 10:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
So, um, are you agreeing that there is no problem? Or did I misunderstand?
If you see a potential issue here, can you explain it as a simple list of
steps, please.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
For example with the same percentile_disc() test as in the other thread:
create table stuff as select random()::numeric as randnum
from generate_series(1,100);
analyze
On 2/20/15 3:09 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
On 20.2.2015 21:01, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Is there a case where the combining function is different from the
transition function, other than for count?
It's different in all the cases when the aggregate state is not
identical to a single value - for
Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-02-20 8:22 GMT+01:00 David Fetter da...@fetter.org:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 07:10:29AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hi
I am happy with doc changes now.
When I test last patch, I found sigfault bug, because host =
PQhost(o_conn); returns NULL. I fexed
Hello Everyone,
I'm Eric Grinstein, an Comp. Engineering undergrad at PUC-Rio, Brazil.
I'm very excited about contributing to Postgres, and thought GSoC would be
a very good program to get me started.
Some commercial RDBMS such as oracle implement a feature called 'Query
Rewrite'
using
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
So, um, are you agreeing that there is no problem? Or did I misunderstand?
If you see a potential issue here, can you explain it as a simple list of
steps, please.
Yes. I'm saying that AFAICT, there is no
On 25.1.2015 12:15, Andrew Gierth wrote:
So given some suitable test data, such as
create table stuff as select random()::text as randtext
from generate_series(1,100); -- or however many rows
you can do
select percentile_disc(0) within group (order by randtext) from stuff;
or
On 2015-02-20 15:44:12 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 2:11 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Yes. It'd be easiest if the only the final insert/update were actually
WAL logged as full actions.
Well, that implies that we'd actually know that we'd succeed
On 21.2.2015 00:14, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
For example with the same percentile_disc() test as in the other
thread:
create table stuff as select random()::numeric as randnum from
generate_series(1,100);
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Isn't this patch about adding abbreviated keys for Numeric data type?
That's how I understood it, and looking into numeric_sortsup.patch seems
to confirm that.
There's another patch for Datum, but that's a
Hi
2015-02-20 21:55 GMT+01:00 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com:
Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-02-20 8:22 GMT+01:00 David Fetter da...@fetter.org:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 07:10:29AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hi
I am happy with doc changes now.
When I test last
2015-02-21 7:04 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com:
Hi
2015-02-20 21:55 GMT+01:00 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com:
Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-02-20 8:22 GMT+01:00 David Fetter da...@fetter.org:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 07:10:29AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hi
2015-02-20 22:25 GMT+01:00 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com:
David Fetter wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 05:55:20PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Gave this patch a look. In general it looks pretty good, but there is
one troublesome point: it duplicates two functions from libpq
On 21.2.2015 00:20, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Tomas Vondra tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I share the view that this would be very valuable, but the scope
far exceeds what can be done within a single GSoC project. But
maybe we could split that into multiple pieces, and Eric would
implement
On 21.2.2015 01:45, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Isn't this patch about adding abbreviated keys for Numeric data type?
That's how I understood it, and looking into numeric_sortsup.patch seems
to confirm that.
On 21.2.2015 02:00, Andrew Gierth wrote:
Tomas == Tomas Vondra tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Right...so don't test a datum sort case, since that isn't supported
at all in the master branch. Your test case is invalid for that
reason.
Tomas What do you mean by 'Datum sort
Tomas == Tomas Vondra tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Right...so don't test a datum sort case, since that isn't supported
at all in the master branch. Your test case is invalid for that
reason.
Tomas What do you mean by 'Datum sort case'?
A case where the code path goes via
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
So you're testing both the patches (numeric + datum tuplesort) at the
same time?
No, I was just testing two similar patches separately. I.e. master vs.
each patch separately.
Well, you're sorting numeric here,
On 02/20/2015 03:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
What I think we should do is to add pg_catalog.data files that contain
the actual data that are automatically parsed by Catalog.pm. Those
contain the rows in some to-be-decided format. I was considering using
json, but it turns out only perl 5.14
On 21/02/15 04:22, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I violently support this proposal.
Maybe something rougly like:
# pg_type.data
CatalogData(
'pg_type',
[
{
oid = 2249,
data = {typname = 'cstring', typlen = -2, typbyval = 1, fake =
'...'},
oiddefine =
On 2/20/15 8:46 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
What about YAML? That might have been added somewhat earlier.
YAML isn't included in Perl, but there is
Module::Build::YAML - Provides just enough YAML support so that
Module::Build works even if YAML.pm is not installed
which might work.
Or what about
I violently support this proposal.
Maybe something rougly like:
# pg_type.data
CatalogData(
'pg_type',
[
{
oid = 2249,
data = {typname = 'cstring', typlen = -2, typbyval = 1, fake =
'...'},
oiddefine = 'CSTRINGOID'
}
]
);
One concern I
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2015-02-20 15:44:12 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 2:11 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Yes. It'd be easiest if the only the final insert/update were actually
WAL logged
On 21.2.2015 01:17, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
So you're testing both the patches (numeric + datum tuplesort) at the
same time?
No, I was just testing two similar patches separately. I.e. master vs.
each patch
Hi,
On 21.2.2015 02:06, Tomas Vondra wrote:
On 21.2.2015 02:00, Andrew Gierth wrote:
Tomas == Tomas Vondra tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Right...so don't test a datum sort case, since that isn't supported
at all in the master branch. Your test case is invalid for that
reason.
On 21/02/15 18:18, Tomas Vondra wrote:
Hi,
On 21.2.2015 02:06, Tomas Vondra wrote:
On 21.2.2015 02:00, Andrew Gierth wrote:
Tomas == Tomas Vondra tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Right...so don't test a datum sort case, since that isn't supported
at all in the master branch. Your
Pushed, thanks.
I reviewed the test results and concluded that the comments were wrong
and the code was right, so I updated the comments to match reality.
--
Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training Services
--
Sent
Hi Alfred,
These questions would be better posted to the general list, but I'll
take a crack at them here:
On 2/20/15 1:18 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
We have a combination of 9.3 and 9.4 databases used for logging of data.
We do not need a strong durability guarantee, meaning it is ok if on
Alexey Klyukin al...@hintbits.com writes:
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Alexander Kukushkin cyberd...@gmail.com
wrote:
I would like to mark 'search_path' as GUC_REPORT:
Given this is a one-liner, which doesn't introduce any new code, but
one flag to the function call, would it be
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 09:45:08AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
#3 bothered me as well because it was not specific enough. I like what
you've added to clarify the procedure.
Good. It took me a while to understand why they have to be in sync ---
because we are using rsync in
Hi,
Right now wal_level=logical implies that the compact commit record
format isn't used and similarly 2pc commits also include the non compact
format of commits.
In the course of the 'replication identifier' patch submitted to the
current commitfest I added more information to the non compact
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
the precedence of = = and is neither sane nor standards compliant.
+1
That was a bit of a pain when I migrated a lot of code from Sybase
ASE to PostgreSQL; I think we should conform to the standard on
this, even if it breaks backward compatibility. (Of
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com writes:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
the precedence of = = and is neither sane nor standards compliant.
I wonder whether it would be feasible to have an option to generate
warnings (or maybe just LOG level messages?)
Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com writes:
I have a memory of running into this in real-world production code
and that it involved booleans. I'll see whether I posted something
to the community lists about it, but it didn't take long to produce
an (admittedly artificial) case where incorrect
Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com writes:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
the precedence of = = and is neither sane nor standards compliant.
I wonder whether it would be feasible to have an option to generate
warnings (or maybe just LOG level messages?) for queries where the
results could
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
One of the reasons I want to make these operators %nonassoc is
so you get an error on cases like these --- if you actually meant
this, you'll be forced to parenthesize one way or the other.
I could live with that versus a configurable warning. It's simpler
Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com wrote:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com writes:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
the precedence of = = and is neither sane nor standards compliant.
I wonder whether it would be feasible to have an option to generate
Hi,
I've been for a long while been rather annoyed about how cumbersome it
is to add catalog rows using the bootstrap format. Especially pg_proc.h,
pg_operator.h, pg_amop.h, pg_amproc.h and some more are really unwieldy.
I think this needs to be improved. And while I'm not going to start
working
Hi,
On 18.2.2015 09:13, Kouhei Kaigai wrote:
In addition to MIN(), MAX(), BIT_AND(), BIT_OR, SUM() for floating
point types, cash and interval. I've now added combine functions
for count(*) and count(col). It seems that int8pl() is suitable for
this.
Do you think it's worth adding any new
Bug #12788 reminded me of a problem I think we've discussed before:
if you use pg_ctl reload to trigger reload of the postmaster's
config files, and there's something wrong with those files, there's
no warning to you of that. The postmaster just bleats to its log and
keeps running. If you don't
Hello,
We have a combination of 9.3 and 9.4 databases used for logging of data.
We do not need a strong durability guarantee, meaning it is ok if on crash a
minute or two of data is lost from our logs. (This is just stats for our
internal tool).
I am looking at this page:
On 2/19/15 10:48 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
I've not really experimented with this at all; it would be useful for
example to see how many regression tests break as a gauge for how
troublesome such changes would be. I thought I'd ask whether there's
any chance at all of such a change getting accepted
On February 19, 2015 08:26:45 PM Tom Lane wrote:
I don't have the time to pursue this idea myself, but perhaps someone
looking for a not-too-complicated project could take it on.
I can have a crack at this. What's the process? Do I add it to a CF once I
have a patch, or do I do that
On 02/19/2015 10:09 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
I fully agree with your summary here. However, why should we suppose
that while we wait, the other backends don't both delete and then
re-insert their tuple? They
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
I think we should try to do it, but we need a way for users to see what
is going on. If we just put into the release notes, the precedences of
= and = have been changed, but we don't expect this to cause many
problems, there might be wide-spread panic.
Hi,
while reviewing one of the 'abbreviated keys' patches, I noticed that
the ordered set aggregates are broken when using tuplesort with multiple
runs.
ISTM this got broken by 5cefbf5a6c4466ac6b1cc2a4316b4eba9108c802:
Don't use abbreviated keys for the final merge pass.
When we write
Is there a case where the combining function is different from the
transition function, other than for count?
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 20.2.2015 21:01, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Is there a case where the combining function is different from the
transition function, other than for count?
It's different in all the cases when the aggregate state is not
identical to a single value - for example the usual avg(), sum() and
stddev()
On 2/20/15 2:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I don't believe there is any practical way for us to generate useful
warnings here; as I said to Kevin, I don't think that Bison exposes
sufficient information to detect when a parsing decision was made
differently than before because of precedence.
We
68 matches
Mail list logo
