Re: [HACKERS] Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

On 10/08/2015 08:19 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: >> On 10/07/2015 10:29 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: Also, the removal of poll_query_until from pg_rewind looks suspiciously like a

Re: [HACKERS] Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: > On 10/08/2015 08:19 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: >>> On 10/07/2015 10:29 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: > Also, the

Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Table partition + join pushdown

Hello, Horiguchi-san. Thank you for your comment. > I got some warning on compilation on unused variables and wrong > arguemtn type. OK, I'll fix it. > I failed to have a query that this patch works on. Could you let > me have some specific example for this patch? Please find attached. And

Re: [HACKERS] pg_ctl/pg_rewind tests vs. slow AIX buildfarm members

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 11:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Paquier writes: >> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> So the attached modified patch adjusts the PID-match logic and some >>> comments, but is otherwise what I posted

Re: [HACKERS] Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

On 10/08/2015 10:39 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: >> On 10/08/2015 08:19 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: On 10/07/2015 10:29 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Oct 7,

Re: [HACKERS] Freeze avoidance of very large table.

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 3:41 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Alvaro Herrera >> wrote: + /* all-frozen information is also

[HACKERS] Process pg_hba.conf keywords as case-insensitive

Hi! This is my first post to this list. (Sorry for my bad english) I decided to start small, but as it is in the TODO, then why not. In TODO: > Process pg_hba.conf keywords as case-insensitive >http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg00432.php It seems to me reasonable to throw

Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Table partition + join pushdown

Hello, thank you for the example. I could see this patch working with it. > > In make_restrictinfos_from_check_constr, the function returns > > modified constraint predicates correspond to vars under > > hashjoinable join clauses. I don't think expression_tree_mutator > > is suitable to do that

[HACKERS] proposal: PL/Pythonu - function ereport

Hi We cannot to raise PostgreSQL exception with setting all possible fields. I propose new function plpy.ereport(level, [ message [, detail [, hint [, sqlstate, ... ) The implementation will be based on keyword parameters, so only required parameters should be used. Examples:

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files

Amir Rohan writes: > Comments? ISTM that all of the "functional" parts of this are superseded by pg_file_settings; or at least, if they aren't, you need to provide a rationale that doesn't consist only of pointing to pre-9.5 discussions. The "advice" parts of it maybe are

Re: [HACKERS] Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual

On 2015/10/07 15:39, Etsuro Fujita wrote: On 2015/10/07 15:06, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: At Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:24:57 -0400, Robert Haas wrote I think it rather requires *replacing* two resjunk columns by one new one. The whole-row references for the individual foreign

[HACKERS] Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files

Hi, Related SO question from '13: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1619/how-to-syntax-check-postgresql-config-files Peter Eisentraut answered: > There is no way to do this that is similar to apache2ctl. If you reload > the configuration files and there is a syntax error, the PostgreSQL

Re: [HACKERS] Small documentation fix in src/interfaces/ecpg/preproc/po/pt_BR.po

Hello, On 10/07/2015 05:18 PM, Euler Taveira wrote: On 06-10-2015 19:49, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote: When working on a script, I stumbled over a mistake in the pt_BR.po translation for ecpg. Patch attached. I've already fixed it in the translation git. It'll be available only in the next

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: index-only scans with partial indexes

On 10/08/2015 07:30 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: Hello, The attached patch applies on the latest v5 patch and will address above issues. (And modifies expected files, which are the manifestation of this improovement). As you see, it is a quite bad choice. Ugly and unreadable and fragile.

Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

Amir Rohan wrote: > But implementing a mechanism that can be used by other features in > the future seems the deciding factor here, rather then the brevity of a > bespoke mini-language. One decision to be taken is which among JSON or mini-language is better for the SR setting. Mini language can

Re: [HACKERS] Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: > On 10/08/2015 10:39 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> Someone mentioned a daisy chain setup which sounds fun. Anything else in >>> particular? Also, it would be nice to have some canned way to measure >>> end-to-end replication latency for variable

Re: [HACKERS] Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

On 10/08/2015 04:47 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: >> On 10/08/2015 10:39 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: Someone mentioned a daisy chain setup which sounds fun. Anything else in particular? Also, it would be nice to have some canned way to

Re: [HACKERS] check fails on Fedora 23

On Tuesday 06 of October 2015 17:59:23 Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 10/06/2015 05:45 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Andrew Dunstan > >> wrote: > >>> Isn't this

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files

On 10/08/2015 02:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Amir Rohan writes: >> Comments? > > ISTM that all of the "functional" parts of this are superseded by > pg_file_settings; To use the new pg_file_settings view you need: 1( 9.5+ 2( a running server The feature is describes as

Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

Hello, The JSON method was used in the patch because it seemed to be the group consensus. Requirement: - Grouping : Specify a list of node names with the required number of ACK for the group. We could have priority or quorum group. Quorum treats all the standby in same level and ACK

Re: [HACKERS] RLS bug in expanding security quals

On 8 October 2015 at 05:45, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> It's quite late here, but I'll take a look at this in more depth >> tomorrow. >> >> Based on what the Assert's testing, I took an educated

Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

Sawada Masahiko wrote: > > I agree with adding support for multi-line GUC parameters. > But I though it is: > param = 'param1, > param2, > param3' > > This reads as 'value1,value2,value3'. Use of '\' ensures that omission the closing quote does not break the entire file. - Beena Emerson

[HACKERS] Windows PostgreSQL and PgAdmin3 Open Source Installers

Hello, hackers! We haven't find how was EnterpriseDB PostgreSQL built for Windows OS. So we choose to build PostgreSQL and PgAdmin3 on ours own and publish our results for community. Sources and patches are living here: https://github.com/postgrespro/pgwininstall PostgreSQL builds with nls

Re: [HACKERS] Tsvector editing functions

There is patch that adds some editing routines for tsvector type. ... When submitting a patch, it's a good idea to explain why someone would want the feature you are adding. Maybe that's obvious to you, but it isn't clear to me why we'd want this. Some examples: tsvector delete(tsvector,

[HACKERS]WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

Hi hackers, I'm working on a patch that allows to combine covering and unique functionality for btree indexes. _Previous discussion was here:_ 1) Proposal thread 2) Message with proposal clarification

[HACKERS] removing set_latch_on_sigusr1

As part of the dynamic background worker mechanism, I introduced a flag set_latch_on_sigusr1. When set, a process sets its own latch any time it receives SIGUSR1. The original motivation for this was that the postmaster sends SIGUSR1 to a process to indicate the death of a background worker, but

Re: [HACKERS] removing set_latch_on_sigusr1

On October 8, 2015 5:41:37 PM GMT+02:00, Robert Haas wrote: >Patch attached. Objections? Suggestions? Comments? I've not reviewed the patch, but +1 for the plan. Andres --- Please excuse brevity and formatting - I am writing this on my mobile phone. -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] Getting sorted data from foreign server

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 6:46 AM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > standard_qp_callback() sets root->query_pathkeys to pathkeys on which the > result of query_planner are expected be sorted upon (see the function for > more details). The patch checks if any prefix of these

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Teach Catalog.pm how many attributes there should be per DATA() line

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:15 AM, David Christensen wrote: > Fixes a build issue I ran into while adding some columns to system tables: > > Throws a build error if we encounter a different number of fields in a > DATA() line than we expect for the catalog in question. >

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Teach Catalog.pm how many attributes there should be per DATA() line

> On Oct 8, 2015, at 11:23 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:15 AM, David Christensen wrote: >> Fixes a build issue I ran into while adding some columns to system tables: >> >>Throws a build error if we encounter a different

Re: [HACKERS]WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

On 8 October 2015 at 16:18, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote: > > Hi hackers, > > I'm working on a patch that allows to combine covering and unique > functionality for btree indexes. > > Previous discussion was here: > 1) Proposal thread > 2) Message with proposal

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Comment fixes

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:17 AM, David Christensen wrote: > Use the correct name “pgindent” in comments. Committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] minor doc patch

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Nikolay Shaplov wrote: > This patch changes in > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/sql-createtype.html > > "variable length" into "variable-length", since in other places there it is > written with "-" in the middle, not " ".

Re: [HACKERS] RLS bug in expanding security quals

On 8 October 2015 at 15:05, Dean Rasheed wrote: > Attached is a simple patch that appears to work, but it needs more > testing (and some regression tests). > Here's an updated patch with an extra regression test case that triggers the issue. I've also updated the

Re: [HACKERS] bugs and bug tracking

On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 03:06:50PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Nathan Wagner (nw...@hydaspes.if.org) wrote: > > I have added full text searching to my tracker. I only index the first > > 50 KB of each message. There's apparently a one MB limit on that > > anyway, which a few messages exceed.

Re: [HACKERS] More work on SortSupport for text - strcoll() and strxfrm() caching

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> If you would care to revise the patch accordingly, I will commit it >> (barring objections from others, of course). > > Here is a revision of

Re: [HACKERS] Multi-tenancy with RLS

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Haribabu Kommi (kommi.harib...@gmail.com) wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Haribabu Kommi >> wrote: >> > Here I attached an updated version of the patch with the following changes. >>

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Documentation bug in 9.5/ master - pg_replication_origin_session_setup

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 2:38 AM, Pallavi Sontakke wrote: > Hi All, > > There appears to be a typo error in documentation of this function. Actual > function is 'pg_replication_origin_session_setup' while documentation has it > as

Re: [HACKERS] Freeze avoidance of very large table.

On October 8, 2015 7:35:24 PM GMT+02:00, Simon Riggs wrote: >The problem is we won't be able to tell the two formats apart, since >they >both are just lots of bits. So we won't be able to tell if the file is >old >format or new format, which could lead to loss of

Re: [HACKERS] More work on SortSupport for text - strcoll() and strxfrm() caching

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > It seems to me that (1) ABBREV_STRING_UINT isn't > a great name for this and (2) the comment is awfully long for the > thing to which it refers. I suggest that we instead call it > DatumToBigEndian(), put it pg_bswap.h,

Re: [HACKERS] bugs and bug tracking

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Nathan Wagner wrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 03:06:50PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Nathan Wagner (nw...@hydaspes.if.org) wrote: > > > I have added full text searching to my tracker. I only index the first > > > 50 KB of each

Re: [HACKERS] Freeze avoidance of very large table.

On 1 October 2015 at 23:30, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 10/01/2015 07:43 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Fujii Masao > wrote: > >> I wonder how much it's worth renaming only the file extension while > >> there are many places

Re: [HACKERS] Freeze avoidance of very large table.

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 3:41 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Alvaro Herrera >>>

Re: [HACKERS] Getting sorted data from foreign server

On 08/10/15 17:09, Robert Haas wrote: > - You consider pushing down ORDER BY if any prefix of the query > pathkeys satisfy is_foreign_expr(), but that doesn't seem right to me. > If the user says SELECT * FROM remotetab ORDER BY a, unsafe(a), > ordering the result set by a doesn't help us much.

[HACKERS] Compiler warning

Commit 7e2a18a9 must have caused this compiler warning which I now see on the master branch with my standard release build settings: gcc -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -Wmissing-format-attribute -Wformat-security -fno-strict-aliasing

Re: [HACKERS] Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: > Wouldn't this work? > 1) start timer > 2) Grab pg_stat_replication.sent_location from master > 3) pg_switch_xlog() # I /think/ we want this, could be wrong For a warm standby, you would want that, but this depends on two factors: - The moment

Re: [HACKERS] Compiler warning

Peter Geoghegan writes: > Commit 7e2a18a9 must have caused this compiler warning which I now see > on the master branch with my standard release build settings: [ scratches head... ] Dunno why my compiler didn't complain about that. Will fix it in a bit.

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: index-only scans with partial indexes

Hello, At Thu, 08 Oct 2015 15:24:35 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote in <56166e93.8000...@2ndquadrant.com> > > > On 10/08/2015 07:30 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > Hello, > > > >> The attached patch applies on the latest v5 patch and will > >> address above issues.

Re: [HACKERS] RLS bug in expanding security quals

Dean, * Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote: > On 8 October 2015 at 15:05, Dean Rasheed wrote: > > Attached is a simple patch that appears to work, but it needs more > > testing (and some regression tests). > > Here's an updated patch with an extra regression

[HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] BUG #13611: test_postmaster_connection failed (Windows, listen_addresses = '0.0.0.0' or '::')

On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 12:36:14AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Tatsuo Ishii writes: > >> When pg_ctl tries to connect to postmaster, it uses "0.0.0.0" as the > >> target ip address. Unfortunately "0.0.0.0" is not a valid address on > >> Windows and it fails. Shouldn't pg_ctl

Re: [HACKERS] Multi-tenancy with RLS

* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > We've got one reloption for views already - security_barrier. Maybe > we could have another one that effectively changes a particular view > from "security definer" as it is today to "security invoker". As I recall, there was a previous suggestion

Re: [HACKERS] More work on SortSupport for text - strcoll() and strxfrm() caching

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > I'm not convinced. Doesn't this exact same concept get used for > over-the-wire communication between BE and LE machines? There, this > operation is spelled htonl/ntohl. Some systems even have htonll, but > I'm sure

Re: [HACKERS] RLS bug in expanding security quals

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 3:50 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote: > On 8 October 2015 at 15:05, Dean Rasheed wrote: >> Attached is a simple patch that appears to work, but it needs more >> testing (and some regression tests). >> > > Here's an updated patch

Re: [HACKERS] SortSupport for UUID type

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > +tmp = ((uint32) res ^ (uint32) ((uint64) res >> 32)); > > The outer set of parentheses here seems pretty worthless. Perhaps one > of the parentheses at the end of the statement should be moved to just > after

Re: [HACKERS] Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual

On 2015/10/08 19:55, Etsuro Fujita wrote: I noticed that the approach using a column to populate the foreign scan's slot directly wouldn't work well in some cases. For example, consider: SELECT * FROM verysmall v LEFT JOIN (bigft1 JOIN bigft2 ON bigft1.x = bigft2.x) ON v.q = bigft1.q AND v.r =

Re: [HACKERS] removing set_latch_on_sigusr1

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:41 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > As it happens, the TupleQueueFunnelNext function I recently committed > has such a hazard, which I failed to spot during review and testing. > If people don't like this, I can instead cause that function to set > the

Re: [HACKERS] Multi-tenancy with RLS

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: >> We've got one reloption for views already - security_barrier. Maybe >> we could have another one that effectively changes a particular view >> from "security definer" as it

Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Beena Emerson wrote: > > > Mini-lang: > [] - to specify prioirty > () - to specify quorum > Format - : [] > Not specifying count defaults to 1. > Ex: s_s_names = '2(cluster1: 1(A,B), cluster2: 2[X,Y,Z], U)' > > JSON > It would contain 2

Re: [HACKERS] pg_ctl/pg_rewind tests vs. slow AIX buildfarm members

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 11:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Michael Paquier writes: >>> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote: So the attached modified patch

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: PL/Pythonu - function ereport

2015-10-08 12:11 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule : > Hi > > We cannot to raise PostgreSQL exception with setting all possible fields. > I propose new function > > plpy.ereport(level, [ message [, detail [, hint [, sqlstate, ... ) > > The implementation will be based on

Re: [HACKERS] More work on SortSupport for text - strcoll() and strxfrm() caching

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> It seems to me that (1) ABBREV_STRING_UINT isn't >> a great name for this and (2) the comment is awfully long for the >> thing to which it

Re: [HACKERS] Getting sorted data from foreign server

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Jeremy Harris wrote: > That depends how often the additional columns affect the sorted > order, if the sort method takes advantage of sorted input. What I'm saying is - ours doesn't. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The