Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM authentication, take three

On 10 April 2017 at 13:57, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 10 April 2017 at 12:34, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> Attached is a patch to hopefully make the discussion progress. I >> simply propose to use sasl as a keyword for pg_hba.conf, on the basis >>

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM authentication, take three

On 10 April 2017 at 12:34, Michael Paquier wrote: > Attached is a patch to hopefully make the discussion progress. I > simply propose to use sasl as a keyword for pg_hba.conf, on the basis > that SASL is the protocol used, and scram is a mechanism used to > achieve the

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 08:11:25PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> >Heikki, are you going to do something about these? We're running out of >> >time. >> >> Sorry I've been procrastinating. I'm on it now. (We need to do

[HACKERS] max_sync_workers_per_subscription is missing in postgresql.conf

Hi all, Attached a patch for $subject. I added this parameter into "Asynchronous Behavior" section of "RESOURCE" section. But GUC parameter for subscriber now is written in this section, in spite of there is "REPLICATION" section. I think that we can coordinate these parameters to not confuse

Re: [HACKERS] [sqlsmith] Planner crash on foreign table join

> "Thomas" == Thomas Munro writes: >> SomeType *x = (SomeType *) lfirst(l); >> >> (in my code I tend to omit the (SomeType *), which I dislike because >> it adds no real protection) Thomas> Just BTW, without that cast it's not compilable as C++, so I'm

Re: [HACKERS] Malformed Array Literal in PL/pgSQL Exception Block

On Apr 9, 2017, at 9:59 PM, Andrew Gierth wrote: > Tom's response has the explanation of why it fails (everywhere, not just > in the exception block): parse analysis prefers to match the (array || > array) form of the operator when given input of (array || unknown).

Re: [HACKERS] Malformed Array Literal in PL/pgSQL Exception Block

> "David" == David E Wheeler writes: >> If you change this to EXCEPTION WHEN division_by_zero THEN, the >> reported error becomes: >> >> ERROR: malformed array literal: "foo" >> LINE 1: SELECT things || 'foo' David> So the issue stands, yes? Tom's response

Re: [HACKERS] Malformed Array Literal in PL/pgSQL Exception Block

On Apr 9, 2017, at 9:52 PM, Andrew Gierth wrote: > This "raise" statement is not reached, because the previous line raises > the "malformed array literal" error. Bah! > David> EXCEPTION WHEN OTHERS THEN > > If you change this to EXCEPTION WHEN

Re: [HACKERS] Malformed Array Literal in PL/pgSQL Exception Block

> "David" == David E Wheeler writes: David> And it works great, including in PL/pgSQL functions, except in David> an exception block. When I run this: David> BEGIN; David> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION foo( David> ) RETURNS BOOLEAN IMMUTABLE LANGUAGE

Re: [HACKERS] Malformed Array Literal in PL/pgSQL Exception Block

"David E. Wheeler" writes: > I’ve been happily using the array-to-element concatenation operator || to > append a single value to an array, e.g, > SELECT array || 'foo'; > And it works great, including in PL/pgSQL functions, except in an > exception block. Hm,

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Sync pg_dump and pg_dumpall output

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > This PostgreSQL 10 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send > a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status > update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership: >

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM authentication, take three

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 1:59 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 3:59 AM, Heikki Linnakangas

[HACKERS] Malformed Array Literal in PL/pgSQL Exception Block

Hackers, I’ve been happily using the array-to-element concatenation operator || to append a single value to an array, e.g, SELECT array || 'foo'; And it works great, including in PL/pgSQL functions, except in an exception block. When I run this: BEGIN; CREATE OR REPLACE

Re: [HACKERS] recent deadlock regression test failures

Thomas Munro writes: > Here's a pair of draft patches for review: I'll look at these in detail tomorrow, but: > 2. pg-safe-snapshot-blocking-pids.patch, to provide an end-user > function wrapping GetSafeSnapshotBlockingPids(). Kevin expressed an > interest in

Re: [HACKERS] recent deadlock regression test failures

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Kevin Grittner writes: >>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I'm imagining an

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Sync pg_dump and pg_dumpall output

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 02:49:41AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 12:26:33PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > * Andrew Dunstan (andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > >> On 03/22/2017 11:39

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 08:11:25PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 04/05/2017 06:53 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > >On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Michael Paquier > > wrote: > >>On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:12 PM, Heikki Linnakangas > >>wrote: > >>>On

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 12:03 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 2:12 AM, Etsuro Fujita > wrote: >> On 2017/04/01 1:32, Jeff Janes wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 5:20 AM, Etsuro Fujita >>>

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication and SIGHUP

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 02:21:29AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> Both launcher and worker don't handle SIGHUP signal and cannot >> reload the configuration. I think that this is a bug. Will add this as >> an open item barring

Re: [HACKERS] strange parallel query behavior after OOM crashes

On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 03:04:13PM +0530, Kuntal Ghosh wrote: > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Kuntal Ghosh > > wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Tomas Vondra > >>> I'm

Re: [HACKERS] Problem in Parallel Bitmap Heap Scan?

On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 09:55:21PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Thomas Munro > >>

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication and SIGHUP

On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 02:21:29AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > Both launcher and worker don't handle SIGHUP signal and cannot > reload the configuration. I think that this is a bug. Will add this as > an open item barring objection. [Action required within three days. This is a generic

Re: [HACKERS] error handling in RegisterBackgroundWorker

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 04:58:40PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Peter Eisentraut > > wrote: > > > How specifically would we do that? And what user would choose the > > > behavior "start this background

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication worker and statistics

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 05:02:18PM +0300, Stas Kelvich wrote: > > On 27 Mar 2017, at 18:59, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > >> Logical replication worker should call pgstat_report_stat()? > >> Currently

[HACKERS] Re: Somebody has not thought through subscription locking considerations

On Sat, Apr 01, 2017 at 02:25:54AM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 01/04/17 01:57, Petr Jelinek wrote: > > On 01/04/17 01:20, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Petr Jelinek writes: > >>> But the pg_subscription_rel is also not accessed on heap_open, the > >>> problematic code is

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication apply to run with sync commit off by default

On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 01:38:41PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 3/24/17 10:49, Petr Jelinek wrote: > > On 07/03/17 06:23, Petr Jelinek wrote: > >> there has been discussion at the logical replication initial copy > >> thread > >> [1] about making apply work with sync commit

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication and inheritance

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 08:25:56AM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > After thinking about it some more, I think the behavior we want would be > that changes to inheritance would reflect in the publication membership. > So if you have a partitioned table, adding more partitions over time > would

Re: [HACKERS] SUBSCRIPTIONS and pg_upgrade

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 09:33:32AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > Peter, > > * Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > On 2/16/17 21:04, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > I'm not entirely sure about the reasoning behind requiring a flag to > > > include subscriptions in pg_dump

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table

Robert Haas writes: > I would appreciate help from other contributors and committers on this > open item; pg_dump is not my strong point. In the absence of such > help, I will do my best with it. I will set aside time this week to > study this and send another update no

Re: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Small issue in online devel documentation build

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 06:59:09PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 3:52 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Attached is a patch that can be applied to pgweb which should fix all of > this. > > Is there any chance we can find a way to do this with actual CSS

Re: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Small issue in online devel documentation build

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 07:00:38PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 2:32 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Sat, Apr  8, 2017 at 12:50:19PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:39 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 7:50 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item. Robert, > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open > item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not

Re: [HACKERS] dropping a partition may cause deadlock

On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 03:48:05PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > I noticed that a deadlock can occur due to the way locking when dropping a > partition proceeds. Steps to reproduce: > > 1. Attach debugger to two sessions, one of which will do a select on the > partitioned parent and the other

Re: [HACKERS] tuple-routing and constraint violation error message, revisited

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:13:03AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > Last message regarding this was by Robert on the original partitioning thread: > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoZjGzSM5WwnyapFaw3GxnDLWh7pm8Xiz8_QWQnUQy%3DSCA%40mail.gmail.com > > Summary is: We decided in

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:38:41PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/03/29 0:39, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 6:50 AM, Amit Langote > > wrote: > >>> Isn't it bogus that this is generating ALTER TABLE .. SET NOT NULL > >>> columns at all? You

Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql

On 04/09/2017 04:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway writes: >>> I turned on the buildfarm "keep" setting and looked at the diffs. The >>> issue is that in there are a few places that do "SELECT ... FROM >>> pg_seclabels ... ORDER BY ..." and when manually testing I get

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench - allow to store select results into variables

Fabien, >> As the variable infrastructures are pretty different between psql & >> pgbench (typed vs untyped values, sorted array vs linked list data >> structure, no hook vs 2 hooks, name spaces vs no such thing...), I >> have chosen the simplest option of just copying the name checking >>

Re: [HACKERS] "left shift of negative value" warnings

Andres Freund writes: > For a while I've been getting warnings like > /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/backend/utils/adt/inet_cidr_ntop.c: In > function ‘inet_cidr_ntop_ipv6’: > /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/backend/utils/adt/inet_cidr_ntop.c:205:11: > warning: left shift

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM authentication, take three

On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 10:28:59AM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 04/07/2017 08:21 AM, Noah Misch wrote: > >Michael shared[1] better pg_hba.conf syntax on 2016-11-05. I agreed[2] with > >his framing of the problem and provided two syntax alternatives, on > >2017-01-18. Michael

Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql

Joe Conway writes: >> I turned on the buildfarm "keep" setting and looked at the diffs. The >> issue is that in there are a few places that do "SELECT ... FROM >> pg_seclabels ... ORDER BY ..." and when manually testing I get default >> database encoding "UTF8" but with the

Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql

On 04/09/2017 03:01 PM, Joe Conway wrote: > On 04/09/2017 02:49 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >> On 2017-04-09 14:28:48 -0700, Joe Conway wrote: >>> Interesting -- rhino is now failing. I tested a minute ago manually on >>> the same buildfarm animal and it passed. I'm on it. >> >> The module for

Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql

On 04/09/2017 02:49 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-04-09 14:28:48 -0700, Joe Conway wrote: >> Interesting -- rhino is now failing. I tested a minute ago manually on >> the same buildfarm animal and it passed. I'm on it. > > The module for segpsql really needs to be improved so it logs >

[HACKERS] "left shift of negative value" warnings

Hi, For a while I've been getting warnings like /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/backend/utils/adt/inet_cidr_ntop.c: In function ‘inet_cidr_ntop_ipv6’: /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/backend/utils/adt/inet_cidr_ntop.c:205:11: warning: left shift of negative value [-Wshift-negative-value] m

Re: [HACKERS] [sqlsmith] Planner crash on foreign table join

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Andrew Gierth wrote: > foreach(l, blah) > { > SomeType *x = (SomeType *) lfirst(l); > > (in my code I tend to omit the (SomeType *), which I dislike because it > adds no real protection) Just BTW, without that cast it's

Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql

On 2017-04-09 14:28:48 -0700, Joe Conway wrote: > Interesting -- rhino is now failing. I tested a minute ago manually on > the same buildfarm animal and it passed. I'm on it. The module for segpsql really needs to be improved so it logs regression.diffs - iirc several other modules do.

Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql

On 04/09/2017 02:04 PM, Joe Conway wrote: > On 04/08/2017 07:29 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> * Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote: >>> On 04/07/2017 05:36 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Joe Conway wrote: >>> >> 1) commit the 0002 patch now

Re: [HACKERS] missing isinf declaration on solaris

On 2014-09-24 16:26:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut writes: > > On 9/24/14 9:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Agreed, but what about non-GCC compilers? > > > Stick AC_PROG_CC_C99 into configure.in. > > I think that's a bad idea, unless you mean to do it only on Solaris. >

Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql

On 04/08/2017 07:29 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote: >> On 04/07/2017 05:36 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Joe Conway wrote: >> >> 1) commit the 0002 patch now before the feature freeze and follow up >> >>with

Re: [HACKERS] problems compiling in solaris 10

Jaime Casanova writes: > I'm compiling HEAD on solaris 10 and i'm getting this warning > float.c: In function ‘is_infinite’: > float.c:201:2: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘isinf’ > [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] There was a previous discussion of

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup: Allow use of arbitrary compression program

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:04 AM, Michael Harris wrote: > Hello, > > Back in pg 9.2, we hacked a copy of pg_basebackup to add a command > line option which would allow the user to specify an arbitrary > external program (potentially including arguments) to be used to > compress

Re: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Small issue in online devel documentation build

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 2:32 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 12:50:19PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:39 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > What other problems do we have with pgweb that I can work on? > > > > Well, the

Re: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Small issue in online devel documentation build

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 3:52 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:01:46AM +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > > > Hello Peter, > > > > >I think the fix belongs into the web site CSS, so there is nothing to > > >commit into PostgreSQL here. > > > > Indeed, the

Re: [HACKERS] [sqlsmith] ERROR: badly formatted node string "RESTRICTINFO...

Andreas Seltenreich writes: > regression=> select (select max(result) from fdw_postgres.num_result) from > tt0; > ERROR: badly formatted node string "RESTRICTINFO :clause {NULLTEST :"... > CONTEXT: parallel worker Apparently, postgres_fdw is trying to store RestrictInfos

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Remove unused argument in btree_xlog_split

Hi Robert, > Thanks. Please add this to the next CommitFest, as there seems to be > no urgency (and some risk) in committing it right before feature > freeze. Sure. Already done [1]. [1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/14/1097/ -- Best regards, Aleksander Alekseev signature.asc

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench - allow to store select results into variables

As the variable infrastructures are pretty different between psql & pgbench (typed vs untyped values, sorted array vs linked list data structure, no hook vs 2 hooks, name spaces vs no such thing...), I have chosen the simplest option of just copying the name checking function and extending

Re: [HACKERS] Remaining 2017-03 CF entries

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 11:24 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > On 2017-04-08 13:09:13 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> Could you consider the item 2PC on FDW as well? It is marked as "Move >> to Next CF" early yesterday but I'm not sure that reason.. > > I've not moved it,

Re: [HACKERS] [sqlsmith] Planner crash on foreign table join

Tom Lane writes: > I made the attached quick-hack patch, and found that check-world > passes just fine with it. That's not complete proof that we have > no other bugs of this ilk, but it definitely supports the idea > that we don't really need to add the overhead. I'll just put this > in the

[HACKERS] [sqlsmith] ERROR: badly formatted node string "RESTRICTINFO...

Hi, I see the above ERROR logged a lot when testing master at eef8c0069e with a postgres_fdw around. Below is a recipe to reproduce it on top of the regression DB. regards, Andreas create extension postgres_fdw; create server myself foreign data wrapper postgres_fdw; create schema

Re: [HACKERS] recent deadlock regression test failures

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Kevin Grittner writes: >> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I'm imagining an API like >>> isolation_test_is_waiting_for(int, int[]) returns bool > >> Good

Re: [HACKERS] Create replication slot in pg_basebackup if requested and not yet present

Hi, Am Freitag, den 24.03.2017, 19:32 +0100 schrieb Michael Banck: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:41:54PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > > So I tend to think that there should always be some explicit user > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Making clausesel.c Smarter

On 8 April 2017 at 09:33, Claudio Freire wrote: > Otherwise, the patch LGTM, but I'd like to solve the quadratic > behavior too... are you going to try? Otherwise I could take a stab at > it myself. It doesn't seem very difficult. I have some ideas in my head in a fairly

Re: [HACKERS] Interval for launching the table sync worker

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 4/7/17 01:10, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> It's not critical but it could be problem. So I thought we should fix >> it before the PostgreSQL 10 release. If it's not appropriate as an >> open item I'll

Re: [HACKERS] Performance improvement for joins where outer side is unique

On 8 April 2017 at 14:23, Tom Lane wrote: > David Rowley writes: > [ unique_joins_2017-04-07b.patch ] > > It turned out that this patch wasn't as close to committable as I'd > thought, but after a full day of whacking at it, I got to a place >