[HACKERS] [sqlsmith] Missing CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in tsquery_rewrite

2016-10-29 Thread Andreas Seltenreich
Hi, testing with sqlsmith yielded an uncancellable backend hogging CPU time. Gdb showed it was busy in findeq() of tsquery_rewrite.c. This function appears to have exponential complexity wrt. the size of the involved tsqueries. The following query runs for 12s on my machine with no way to

Re: [HACKERS] make coverage-html on OS X

2016-10-29 Thread Jim Nasby
tl;dr: It's critical that you actually do a make install, or at least it is if you've set --prefix with configure. If you don't, then even if you do make check you'le going to get the *installed* libpq, and not the *built* libpq. Also, looks like there's a race between the .info and .c.gcov

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-29 Thread Gilles Darold
Le 29/10/2016 à 14:38, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : > On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:03:37 +0200 > Gilles Darold wrote: > >> ... >> v9 of the patch, attached here. > Attached are 2 more documentation patchs to apply on > top of your v9 patch. > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Speed of user-defined aggregates using array_append as transfn

2016-10-29 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > I'm still worried about chewing up a kilobyte-at-least for each transition > value, but maybe that's something we could leave to fix later. Another > idea is that we could teach the planner to know about that in its hash > table size estimates. Here's a complete proposed patch for

Re: [HACKERS] Streaming basebackups vs pg_stat_tmp

2016-10-29 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 9:57 PM, David Steele wrote: > On 10/28/16 3:49 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > The change from 10 to 11 increases the tests that are skipped on Windows, > which is necessary because one extra symlink test is added. > > I think you need: > > [...] > > The

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-29 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:03:37 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > ... > v9 of the patch, attached here. Attached are 2 more documentation patchs to apply on top of your v9 patch. patch_pg_current_logfile-v9.diff.doc_current_logfiles Explains the current_logfiles file in the

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: scan key push down to heap [WIP]

2016-10-29 Thread Dilip Kumar
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > The gains are quite noticeable in some cases. So if we can make it work > without noticeable downsides... > > What I'm worried about though is that this, afaics, will quite > noticeably *increase* total cost in cases