Re: [HACKERS] COPY (INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE .. RETURNING ..)

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 1:15 AM, Teodor Sigaev wrote: >> Patch is switched to "ready for committer". > > Committed, thank you Thanks. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

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

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I moved all the initialization code (deleting stuff from environment, > detecting Windows, opening SimpleTie filedescs etc) into BEGIN blocks, > which run earlier than any other code. Ah, OK. Thanks. That makes visibly the whole set of

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

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > 2015-11-27 17:54 GMT+01:00 Teodor Sigaev : >> >> Is this patch in 'Waiting on Author' state actually? I am marking it as returned with feedback for this CF then. -- Michael -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] Use pg_rewind when target timeline was switched

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 11:42 PM, Teodor Sigaev wrote: > Seems, patch is ready to commit. But it needs some documentation. Of what kind? The documentation of pg_rewind is rather explicit on the subject and looks fine as-is, and that's what Alexander and I agreed on upthread. If

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

Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Hmm. I just noticed RewindTest sets $ENV{PGDATABASE} outside BEGIN. Not > > sure what to think of that. Could instead pass the database name in > > $node->getConnStr() calls, like run_pg_rewind() is already

Re: [HACKERS] Using quicksort for every external sort run

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Greg Stark wrote: > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> Yes, I really do mean it when I say that the DBA is not supposed to >> see this message, no matter how much or how little memory or data is >>

Re: [HACKERS] Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> >> On 17 November 2015 at 11:48, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> >>> >>> I think in that case what we can do is if the

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

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > Yeah, we need to consider to compute checksum if enabled. > I've changed the patch, and attached. > Please review it. Thanks for the update. This now conflicts with the updates doesn to fix pg_upgrade

Re: [HACKERS] Errors in our encoding conversion tables

I wrote: > There's a discussion over at > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/2sa.dhu5.1hk1yrptnfy.1ml...@seznam.cz > of an apparent error in our WIN1250 -> LATIN2 conversion. Attached is an updated patch (against today's HEAD) showing proposed changes to bring cyrillic_and_mic.c and

Re: [HACKERS] Using quicksort for every external sort run

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: > >> I agree we don't want to optimize for low memory, but I don't think we >> should throw it under the bus, either. Right now we are effectively

Re: [HACKERS] Using quicksort for every external sort run

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > For me very large sorts (100,000,000 ints) with work_mem below 4MB do > better with unpatched than with your patch series, by about 5%. Not a > big deal, but also if it is easy to keep the old behavior then I think > we

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Make timestamptz_out less slow.

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 2:20 AM, David Rowley wrote: > Just to confirm, you mean this comment? > > int tm_year; /* relative to 1900 */ > > Please let me know if you disagree, but I'm not sure it's the business of > this patch to fix that. If it's wrong now, then it

[HACKERS] Re: Multixact slru doesn't don't force WAL flushes in SlruPhysicalWritePage()

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:22:47PM -0500, Noah Misch wrote: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 10:40:07PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > > /* > > * Optional array of WAL flush LSNs associated with entries in the SLRU > > * pages. If not zero/NULL, we must flush WAL before writing pages > >

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

2015-11-28 13:11 GMT+01:00 Michael Paquier : > On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: > > > > > > 2015-11-27 17:54 GMT+01:00 Teodor Sigaev : > >> > >> Is this patch in 'Waiting on Author' state actually? > > I