Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

On 7 March 2016 at 18:19, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > Here I attached update patch with further changes, > 1. Explain plan changes for parallel grouping Perhaps someone might disagree with me, but I'm not all that sure I really get the need for that. With nodeAgg.c we're

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

Reply to multiple hackers. Thank you for reviewing this patch. > +used. Priority is given to servers in the order that the appear > in the list. > > s/the appear/they appear/ > > -The minimum wait time is the roundtrip time between primary to standby. > +The minimum wait time is the

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.

Horiguchi-san, Thanks a lot for taking a look! On 2016/03/07 13:02, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Sat, 5 Mar 2016 16:41:29 +0900, Amit Langote wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >>> So, I took the Vinayak's latest patch and rewrote it a

Re: [HACKERS] silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions

Hi, On 2016-03-05 19:54:05 -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > I started working on this; delayed by taking longer than planned on the > logical decoding stuff (quite a bit complicated by > e1a11d93111ff3fba7a91f3f2ac0b0aca16909a8). I'm not very happy with the > error handling as it is right now. For

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

> From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Mark Kirkwood > For cloud - in particular Openstack (which I am working with ATM), the > biggest thing would be: > > - multi-master replication > > or failing that: > > - self managing single

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

Peter Geoghegan writes: > In summary, I think it's surprising that a max_parallel_degree of 1 > doesn't disable parallel workers entirely. Yeah, it's not exactly clear what "1" should mean that's different from "0", in this case. regards, tom lane --

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 9:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Perhaps it was intentional when written, but if Robert's advice is correct > that the new upper-planner path nodes should copy up parallel_degree from > their children, then it cannot be the case that parallel_degree>0 in a >

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

Amit Kapila writes: > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> AFAICS, those are about generating partial paths, which is a completely >> different thing from whether a regular path is parallel-safe or not. > Okay, but the main point I

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

Haribabu Kommi writes: > 2. Temporary fix for float aggregate types in _equalAggref because of > a change in aggtype to trans type, otherwise the parallel aggregation > plan failure in set_plan_references. whenever the aggtype is not matched, > it verifies with the trans

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:21 PM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > > Pending: > 1. Explain plan needs to be corrected for parallel grouping similar like > parallel aggregate. Here I attached update patch with further changes, 1. Explain plan changes for parallel grouping 2.

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Amit Kapila writes: > Is there some reason why hash and nestloop are safe but merge isn't? > > > To make hash and nestloop work in parallel queries, we just push those > > nodes below gather

Re: [HACKERS] psql completion for ids in multibyte string

At Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:30:17 -0500, Robert Haas wrote in > >>> I committed this and back-patched this but (1) I avoided changing the > >>> other functions for now and (2) I gave both the byte length and

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.

Hi, Thank you for the patch. At Sat, 5 Mar 2016 16:41:29 +0900, Amit Langote wrote in > On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > > So, I took the Vinayak's latest

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

Amit Kapila writes: Is there some reason why hash and nestloop are safe but merge isn't? > To make hash and nestloop work in parallel queries, we just push those > nodes below gather node. Refer code > paths match_unsorted_outer()->consider_parallel_nestloop() >

Re: [HACKERS] Badly designed error reporting code in controldata_utils.c

Joe Conway writes: > On 03/06/2016 05:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> That's much better, but is there a reason you're using exit(2) >> and not exit(EXIT_FAILURE) ? > Only because I was trying to stick with what was originally in > src/bin/pg_controldata/pg_controldata.c Meh. It

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Amit Kapila writes: > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Is there some reason why hash and nestloop are safe but merge isn't? > > > I think it is because we

Re: [HACKERS] JPUG wants to have a copyright notice on the translated doc

> Thanks. > > Korean Document is translating currently. Oh, I see. > When that be done, I will announce to official site. > current, translation progress is 50%. > This work is dependent only voluntary support by 6 peoples. > so, translating is very slow. :) Same thing can be said to Japanese

Re: [HACKERS] JPUG wants to have a copyright notice on the translated doc

Thanks. Korean Document is translating currently. When that be done, I will announce to official site. current, translation progress is 50%. This work is dependent only voluntary support by 6 peoples. so, translating is very slow. :) I also hope that many Korean documents appear on the official

Re: [HACKERS] JPUG wants to have a copyright notice on the translated doc

You'd better to ask to place the below above to http://www.postgresql.org/docs/. Currently only French and Japanese are listed. I'm sure there are more local translations. Not only people living in Korea are interested in Korean translated docs. There are many Korean speaking people in the

Re: [HACKERS] Badly designed error reporting code in controldata_utils.c

On 03/06/2016 05:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway writes: >> Something like the attached what you had in mind? > > That's much better, but is there a reason you're using exit(2) > and not exit(EXIT_FAILURE) ? Only because I was trying to stick with what was originally in

Re: [HACKERS] JPUG wants to have a copyright notice on the translated doc

Thanks too! Korean User Group has been translating PGDoc since 2013. I'll append Copyright in PGDoc.kr too. http://postgresql.kr/docs/current/ Regards, Ioseph. 2016-03-04 (금), 17:55 -0800, Joshua D. Drake: > On 03/04/2016 05:39 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > JPUG (Japan PostgreSQL Users Group)

Re: [HACKERS] Badly designed error reporting code in controldata_utils.c

Joe Conway writes: > Something like the attached what you had in mind? That's much better, but is there a reason you're using exit(2) and not exit(EXIT_FAILURE) ? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.

Hi Amit, Thank you for updating the patch. I am testing it and I will try to improve it. Regards, Vinayak > -Original Message- > From: Amit Langote [mailto:amitlangot...@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2016 4:41 PM > To: Robert Haas > Cc: SPS ポクレ

Re: [HACKERS] The plan for FDW-based sharding

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > I've got to say that this is somewhat reminicient of the discussions around > in-core pooling, where argument 1 is applied to justify excluding pooling > from core/contrib. > > I don't have a strong position on whether

Re: [HACKERS] Badly designed error reporting code in controldata_utils.c

On 2016-03-06 17:16:42 -0800, Joe Conway wrote: > - #ifndef FRONTEND > - /* NOTE: caller must provide gettext call around the format string */ > - #define log_error(...) \ > - elog(ERROR, __VA_ARGS__) > - #else > - #define log_error(...) \ > - do { \ > - char

Re: [HACKERS] The plan for FDW-based sharding

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > I can imagine that many such hooks would have little use beyond PPAS, but > I'm somewhat curious as to if any would have wider applications. It's not > unusual for me to be working on something and think "gee, I wish

Re: [HACKERS] Badly designed error reporting code in controldata_utils.c

On 03/06/2016 01:26 PM, Joe Conway wrote: > On 03/06/2016 01:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> * It's randomly unlike every single other place we've addressed the >> same problem. Everywhere else in src/common does it like this: [...snip...] >> and I think that's what this needs to do too, especially

[HACKERS] gzclose don't set properly the errno in pg_restore

Hi all, I'm facing with a strange error message during a failed pg_restore: pg_restore: processing data for table "historicopesquisaitem" pg_restore: [directory archiver] could not close data file: Success I got this error trying to restore from a directory dump file. Looking at the pg_restore

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: "Causal reads" mode for load balancing reads without stale data

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Thomas Munro > wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Amit Langote >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 2016/02/29

Re: [HACKERS] character_not_in_repertoire vs. untranslatable_character

Chapman Flack writes: > So there's an ISO error 22021 "character not in repertoire" and > a PostgreSQL error 22P05 "untranslatable character" that seem > very similar. > If I look in backend/utils/mb/wchar.c, it looks as if PostgreSQL > uses the first for the case of a

Re: [HACKERS] The plan for FDW-based sharding

On 6 Mar 2016 8:27 p.m., "Peter Geoghegan" wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > Yeah, I agree with that. I am utterly mystified by why Bruce keeps > > beating this drum, and am frankly pretty annoyed about it. In the > >

Re: [HACKERS] Badly designed error reporting code in controldata_utils.c

On 03/06/2016 01:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > * It's randomly unlike every single other place we've addressed the > same problem. Everywhere else in src/common does it like this: > > #ifndef FRONTEND > ereport(ERROR, > (errcode(ERRCODE_PROGRAM_LIMIT_EXCEEDED), >

[HACKERS] Badly designed error reporting code in controldata_utils.c

My attention was drawn to the log_error() stuff in controldata_utils.c by the fact that buildfarm member pademelon spit up on it. The reason for that compile failure is that pademelon's dinosaur of a compiler doesn't support __VA_ARGS__. I do not feel a need to get into a discussion about

Re: [HACKERS] The plan for FDW-based sharding

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > Yeah, I agree with that. I am utterly mystified by why Bruce keeps > beating this drum, and am frankly pretty annoyed about it. In the > first place, he seems to think that he invented the idea of using FDWs > for

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup compression TODO item

On 03-03-2016 14:44, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Andres Freund > wrote: > > On 2016-03-03 18:31:03 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > I think we want it at protocol level rather than pg_basebackup level. > >

[HACKERS] character_not_in_repertoire vs. untranslatable_character

So there's an ISO error 22021 "character not in repertoire" and a PostgreSQL error 22P05 "untranslatable character" that seem very similar. If I look in backend/utils/mb/wchar.c, it looks as if PostgreSQL uses the first for the case of a corrupted encoding (bytes that can't be decoded to a

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

Amit Kapila writes: > On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Is there some reason why hash and nestloop are safe but merge isn't? > I think it is because we consider to pushdown hash and nestloop to workers, > but not merge join and the

Re: [HACKERS] Typo in psql-ref.sgml

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > Hi, > > While translating the 9.5 ref/psql-ref.sgml, I found this: > > and variables shows help about about > psql configuration variables > > The word "about" is written twice. Sounds like a nice typo to me :) >

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 3:00 PM, David Rowley wrote: > On 17 February 2016 at 17:50, Haribabu Kommi wrote: >> Here I attached a draft patch based on previous discussions. It still needs >> better comments and optimization. > > Over in [1]

[HACKERS] Typo in psql-ref.sgml

Hi, While translating the 9.5 ref/psql-ref.sgml, I found this: and variables shows help about about psql configuration variables The word "about" is written twice. Sounds like a nice typo to me :) See attached patch (for 9.5 and HEAD). Thanks. -- Guillaume.