On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 03 Aug 2017, at 19:27, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> There were no APIs to get the TLS finish message last time I looked at OSX
>> stuff, which mattered for tls-unique. It would be nice if we could get one.
>
> Yeah, AFAICT there is no
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 08:55:37AM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> On 06/04/17 03:51, Noah Misch wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> >>> On Mon, Dec 1
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 3:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> So we can remove scanned_tuples from LVRelStats struct and change the
>> variable name num_tuples to scanned_tuples. Attached updated patch.
>
> On second thought, I think we should just
Shay Rojansky writes:
> I tested the patch.
Thanks!
> Doing SSL_CTX_set_session_cache_mode(context, SSL_SESS_CACHE_OFF) doesn't
> have any effect whatsoever - I still have the same issue (session id
> context uninitialized). I suspect session caching is an entirely different
> feature from sessi
On 2017-08-04 07:22:42 +0300, Shay Rojansky wrote:
> I'm still not convinced of the risk/problem of simply setting the session
> id context as I explained above (rather than disabling the optimization),
> but of course either solution resolves my problem.
How would that do anything? Each backend h
I tested the patch.
Doing SSL_CTX_set_session_cache_mode(context, SSL_SESS_CACHE_OFF) doesn't
have any effect whatsoever - I still have the same issue (session id
context uninitialized). I suspect session caching is an entirely different
feature from session tickets/RFC5077 (although it might stil
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Michael,
>
> * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> > * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> >> Do you need a back-patchable version for 9.6? I could g
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
Yes, I also think the same idea can be used, in fact, I have mentioned
it [1] as soon as you have committed that patch. Do we want to do
anything at this stage for PG-10? I do
On 2017/08/04 1:52, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 5:55 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
I updated the patch that way. Attached is a new version of the patch.
Committed.
Thanks again.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
T
On 2017/08/04 10:00, Amit Langote wrote:
On 2017/08/04 1:06, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
On 2017/08/03 17:12, Amit Langote wrote:
Attached updated patches.
Thanks for the patch! That looks good to me.
Committed with some comment changes.
Than
On 3 Aug 2017 2:16 am, "Andres Freund" wrote:
Hi Andres thanks for detailed review. I agree with all of the comments. I
am going for a vacation. Once I come back I will fix those comments and
will submit a new patch.
On 7/31/17 20:42, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> That looks like a bug to me. ALTER USER also does not support the IN
> DATABASE clause, so the code deviation might have started there already.
>
> I propose the attached patch to clean this up.
>
> For backpatching, I could develop some less invasive
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I'll provide another update tomorrow. Hopefully Michael is able to produce
> > a 9.6 patch, otherwise I'll do it.
>
> I have sent an updated version of the patch, with something that c
Michael,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >> Do you need a back-patchable version for 9.6? I could get one out of
> >> my pocket if necessary.
> >
> > I was just t
Tom, all,
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
> This needs more cleanup, testing, and comments explaining why we're
> doing this (and then perhaps comments, somewhere.. in the backend ACL
> code that explains that the ordering needs to be preserved), but the
> basic idea seems sound to me
On 2017/08/04 1:08, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Robert Haas writes:
>>> So maybe --load-via-partition-root if nobody likes my previous
>>> suggestion of --partition-data-via-root ?
>>
>> WFM.
>>
>
> ​+1
+1.
Thanks,
Amit
--
Sent via pgsql
On 2017/08/04 2:13, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:35 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas writes:
>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Amit Langote
>>> wrote:
Attached is a patch. I think this could be considered a bug-fix,
backpatchable to 9.6 which introduced this beha
On 2017/08/04 1:06, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Etsuro Fujita
> wrote:
>> On 2017/08/03 17:12, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> Attached updated patches.
>>
>> Thanks for the patch! That looks good to me.
>
> Committed with some comment changes.
Thanks a lot.
Regards,
Amit
On 2017/08/04 3:29, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Amit Langote
> wrote:
>> Alright, attached updated 0001 does that.
>
> Committed 0001 and 0002.
Thanks.
> 0003 needs a rebase.
Rebased patch attached.
Thanks,
Amit
From f069845c027acc36aab4790d6d6afbf50bba803e Mon Sep 17
I wrote:
> In short, therefore, it's looking to me like analyzeCTE() is wrong here.
> It should allow the case where the recursive result has typmod -1 while
> the non-recursive output column has some more-specific typmod, so long
> as they match on type OID. That would correspond to what we do in
I'm not sure why bug #7926 didn't get any love when filed,
but the issue came up again today:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/264036359.6712710.1501784552...@mail.yahoo.com
and it does seem like this is pretty curious behavior.
A minimal reproducer is
regression=# create table base (f1 numer
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 6:08 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> That's another way to go, but it requires inventing a way to thread
>> the IV through the hash opclass interface.
>
> Only if we really want to do it really well :P. Using a hash_combine()
> like
>
> /*
> * Combine two hash values, resulting
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 07/31/2017 06:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> but could we do something like
>> my $pflags = "PROVE_FLAGS='" . ($ENV{PROVE_FLAGS} || "--timer") . "'";
>> to allow overriding this choice from the buildfarm config?
> I have committed this in a slightly different form.
Thanks.
To better understand a limitation I ask 5 questions
What is the limitation?
Why is there a limitation?
Why is it a limitation?
What can we do?
Is it feasible?
Through some reading:
*What is the limitation?*
presupposes that count(distinct y) has exactly the same notion of equality
that the PK un
On 2017-08-03 17:57:37 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2017-08-03 17:43:44 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> For me, the basic point here is that we need a set of hash functions
> >> for hash partitioning that are different than what we use for
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-08-03 17:43:44 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> For me, the basic point here is that we need a set of hash functions
>> for hash partitioning that are different than what we use for hash
>> indexes and hash joins -- otherwise when we hash
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Do you have any feeling for which of those endianness-independent hash
>> functions might be a reasonable choice for us?
>
> Not a strong / very informed one, TBH.
>
> I'm not convinced it's worth trying to achieve this in the first place,
>
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Oliver Ford wrote:
> The formatting.c file specifies it as a TODO, so I thought implementing it
> would be worthwhile. As there is a to_roman conversion having it the other
> way is good for completeness.
Huh, didn't know about that. Well, I'm not direly opposed t
Hi,
On 2017-08-03 17:43:44 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> For me, the basic point here is that we need a set of hash functions
> for hash partitioning that are different than what we use for hash
> indexes and hash joins -- otherwise when we hash partition a table and
> create hash indexes on each pa
Michael Banck writes:
> Am Donnerstag, den 27.07.2017, 15:52 -0400 schrieb Tom Lane:
>> So I'm thinking we should consider the multi-pass patch I posted as
>> a short-term, backpatchable workaround, which we could hope to
>> replace with dependency logic later.
> +1, it would be really nice if th
Hi,
On 2017-08-03 17:09:41 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Just to clarify: I don't think it's a problem to do so for integers and
> > most other simple scalar types. There's plenty hash algorithms that are
> > endianess independent, and the re
> On 03 Aug 2017, at 19:27, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> In https://postgr.es/m/69db7657-3f9d-4d30-8a4b-e06034251...@yesql.se I
>> presented a WIP patch for adding support for the Apple Secure Transport SSL
>> library on macOS as, an alt
On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Just to clarify: I don't think it's a problem to do so for integers and
> most other simple scalar types. There's plenty hash algorithms that are
> endianess independent, and the rest is just a bit of care.
Do you have any feeling for which o
On 07/31/2017 06:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> but could we do something like
> my $pflags = "PROVE_FLAGS='" . ($ENV{PROVE_FLAGS} || "--timer") . "'";
>
> to allow overriding this choice from the buildfarm config?
>
>
I have committed this in a slightly different form.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent
2017-08-03 22:54 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule :
>
>
> 2017-08-03 22:14 GMT+02:00 Peter Eisentraut com>:
>
>> I'm looking to update the SQL conformance list for the release. I'm
>> wondering whether the new xmltable feature fully completes the following
>> items:
>>
>> X300XMLTable
>> X301XMLT
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Is there a preferred method to select between using elog() and
> errmsg_internal()?
ereport(... errmsg_internal() ...) can be a win for debug messages that
are in hot code paths, because the test for whether the message will
get printed is able to short-circuit more wor
2017-08-03 22:14 GMT+02:00 Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com>:
> I'm looking to update the SQL conformance list for the release. I'm
> wondering whether the new xmltable feature fully completes the following
> items:
>
> X300XMLTable
> X301XMLTable: derived column list o
Tom Lane wrote:
> I think Peter's got the error and the detail backwards. It should be
> more like
>
> ERROR: "someview" cannot have constraints
> DETAIL: "someview" is a view.
>
> If we do it like that, we need one ERROR message per error reason,
> and one DETAIL per relkind, which should be m
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Is there a preferred method to select between using elog() and
> errmsg_internal()?
>
> Attached is a patch that converts some DEBUG messages to one of those
> two to remove them from translation, but I'm not sure which one to pick
> other than by random aesthetics.
I th
Is there a preferred method to select between using elog() and
errmsg_internal()?
Attached is a patch that converts some DEBUG messages to one of those
two to remove them from translation, but I'm not sure which one to pick
other than by random aesthetics.
--
Peter Eisentraut http:/
I'm looking to update the SQL conformance list for the release. I'm
wondering whether the new xmltable feature fully completes the following
items:
X300XMLTable
X301XMLTable: derived column list option
X302XMLTable: ordinality column option
X303XMLTable: column default option
X304
On Thursday, 3 August 2017, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Oliver Ford > wrote:
> > Adds to the to_number() function the ability to convert Roman numerals
> > to a number. This feature is on the formatting.c TODO list. It is not
> > currently implemented in either Oracle, M
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 01:45:02PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Oliver Ford wrote:
> > Adds to the to_number() function the ability to convert Roman numerals
> > to a number. This feature is on the formatting.c TODO list. It is not
> > currently implemented in either
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Amit Langote
wrote:
> Alright, attached updated 0001 does that.
Committed 0001 and 0002. 0003 needs a rebase.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@post
For the CREATE stuff, the script language is SQL, the command to use it is
"psql"...
The real and hard part is to fill tables with meaningful pseudo-random
test data which do not violate constraints for any non trivial schema
involving foreign keys and various unique constraints.
The solut
Hi Doug,
On 2017-08-03 18:01:06 +, Douglas Doole wrote:
> Back when you were getting ready to commit your faster expressions, I
> volunteered to look at switching from an array of fixed sized steps to
> tightly packed structures. (
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170314221648.jrcgh5n
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> So we can remove scanned_tuples from LVRelStats struct and change the
> variable name num_tuples to scanned_tuples. Attached updated patch.
On second thought, I think we should just leave this alone.
scanned_tuples is closely tied to tupcou
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Oliver Ford wrote:
> Adds to the to_number() function the ability to convert Roman numerals
> to a number. This feature is on the formatting.c TODO list. It is not
> currently implemented in either Oracle, MSSQL or MySQL so gives
> PostgreSQL an edge :-)
I kind of
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> In https://postgr.es/m/69db7657-3f9d-4d30-8a4b-e06034251...@yesql.se I
> presented a WIP patch for adding support for the Apple Secure Transport SSL
> library on macOS as, an alternative to OpenSSL. That patch got put on the
> backburner
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> I can see your point. The v1 proposed above adds quite a lot of error
> code churn to deal with the lack of missing_ok flag in
> getObjectDescription, getObjectIdentity and getObjectIdentityParts.
> And the cache lookup error messages canno
On 7/13/17 23:53, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> To summary, I think we now have only one issue; ALTER SUBSCRIPTION is
> not transactional, 0004 patch is addressing this issue .
We have two competing patches for this issue. This patch moves the
killing to the end of the DDL transaction. Your earlier p
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:35 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Amit Langote
>> wrote:
>>> Attached is a patch. I think this could be considered a bug-fix,
>>> backpatchable to 9.6 which introduced this behavior change [1].
>
>> I could go either way on
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 5:55 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> I updated the patch that way. Attached is a new version of the patch.
Committed.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > So maybe --load-via-partition-root if nobody likes my previous
> > suggestion of --partition-data-via-root ?
>
> WFM.
>
​+1
David J.​
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:10 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 7:59 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
>> Adding AppendRelInfos to root->append_rel_list as and when they are
>> created would keep parent AppendRelInfos before those of children. But
>> that function throws away the AppendRel
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> On 2017/08/03 17:12, Amit Langote wrote:
>> Attached updated patches.
>
> Thanks for the patch! That looks good to me.
Committed with some comment changes.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL
[ Shoulda got this out sooner, but better late than never ]
We'll be doing routine quarterly releases of supported Postgres
back branches next week (tarballs wrapped Monday 7th, public
announcement Thursday 10th). We'll release v10 beta3 at the
same time.
regards, tom lan
Robert Haas writes:
> So maybe --load-via-partition-root if nobody likes my previous
> suggestion of --partition-data-via-root ?
WFM.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://ww
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 1:55 AM, Zeray Kalayu wrote:
> Therefore, I feel and think that I am a bit in a hurry to be DB
> hacker. But given time, indefatigability and PG community support, I
> believe that I will manage to achieve my dream.
Indefatigability is key.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: ht
Joe Conway wrote:
> On 08/02/2017 10:52 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
> >> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >>> I think pg_class is a reasonable place to put more generic relkind lists
> >>> alongside a matching error message for each, rather than
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> postmaster algorithms rely on the PG_SETMASK() calls preventing that. Without
> such protection, duplicate bgworkers are an understandable result. I caught
> several other assertions; the PMChildFlags failure is another case of
> duplicate pos
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 8/2/17 13:58, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I notice that the option list already includes some references to
>> "insert", so maybe "--insert-via-partition-root"? Although you could
>> argue that that's confusing when we're using COPY.
>
> "load"
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
> --unpartition-partitioned-table is very confusing.
+1.
> I liked the previous option which is --use-partitioned-table
> [partition-name, ...].
> The Only problem with --use-partitioned-table is, a user needs to specify
> the
> partition-nam
Masahiko Sawada writes:
> If we want to create other tables and load data to them as we want we
> can do that using psql -f. So an alternative ways is having a flexible
> style option for example --custom-initialize = { [load, create_pkey,
> create_fkey, vacuum], ... }. That would solve this in a
On 08/02/2017 10:52 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> I think pg_class is a reasonable place to put more generic relkind lists
>>> alongside a matching error message for each, rather than specialized
>>> "does this rel
On 08/02/2017 10:30 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> 0001-RELKIND_HAS_VISIBILITY_MAP.patch - one place
>> 0002-RELKIND_HAS_STORAGE.patch - one place
>> 0003-RELKIND_HAS_XIDS-macro.patch - one place
>> 0004-RELKIND_HAS_COMPOSITE_TYPE-macro.patch - on
Fabien COELHO writes:
> As for a more generic solution, the easy part are the "CREATE" stuff and
> the transaction script stuff (existing pgbench scripts).
> For the CREATE stuff, the script language is SQL, the command to use it is
> "psql"...
> The real and hard part is to fill tables with m
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 5:49 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Hello Rod,
>
> This version of the table attempts to stipulate which section of the
>> process the rule applies to.
>>
>
> The table should be referenced from the description, something like "Table
> xxx summarizes the ..."
>
Added the be
On Thursday, August 3, 2017, Rushabh Lathia
wrote:
>
>
> --use-partitioned-table [partitioned_name, ...] # if
> names are omitted it defaults to all the partitioned tables.
>
> Here user need to specify the root relation name in the option - and any
> partition table have that as a ROOT, will loa
Antonin Houska writes:
> I've noticed that the dummypp field of ProjectionPath is set but never read.
I do not think removing that field is a good idea, even if it's not used
in the current form of the logic. It's useful for debugging purposes at
least. See original commit comment at
https://g
On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 11:34:13AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > It seems so. Basically, in the case of a large number of duplicates,
> > we hit the maximum number of overflow pages. There is a theoretical
> > possibility of hitting it but it
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <
ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:47 PM, David G. Johnston
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>
> >> Robert Haas writes:
> >> > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>
I've noticed that the dummypp field of ProjectionPath is set but never read.
If the only possible change between the path and plan creation time is that
the projection path and the subpath targetlists become different, then dummypp
could be used this way:
diff --git a/src/backend/optimizer/plan/c
> On 03 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> On 08/03/2017 01:02 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>
>> The frontend has support for using PEM files for certificates and keys. It
>> can
>> also look up the key for the certificate in a Keychain, or both certificate
>> and
>> key in a
Hi,
> * The previous coding allowed for a fast path to access the last
> unowned relation, which this patch removes. It seems a good idea to
> cache the last unowned relation, or if not explain why the comment
> that says why it worked that way is no longer true.
>
> * We should only create the h
On 08/03/2017 01:02 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
In https://postgr.es/m/69db7657-3f9d-4d30-8a4b-e06034251...@yesql.se I
presented a WIP patch for adding support for the Apple Secure Transport SSL
library on macOS as, an alternative to OpenSSL. That patch got put on the
backburner for a bit, but
Am Donnerstag, den 27.07.2017, 15:52 -0400 schrieb Tom Lane:
> So I'm thinking we should consider the multi-pass patch I posted as
> a short-term, backpatchable workaround, which we could hope to
> replace with dependency logic later.
+1, it would be really nice if this could be fixed in the back-
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:47 PM, David G. Johnston
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> Robert Haas writes:
>> > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> >> --restore-via-partition-root ?
>>
>> > I worry someone will think that pg_dump is now restoring stuff
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 7:27 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> An alternative approach is to have some kind of other identifier,
>> let's call it a distributed transaction ID (DXID) which is mapped by
>> each node onto a local XID.
>
> Postgres-XL seems to manage this problem by
In https://postgr.es/m/69db7657-3f9d-4d30-8a4b-e06034251...@yesql.se I
presented a WIP patch for adding support for the Apple Secure Transport SSL
library on macOS as, an alternative to OpenSSL. That patch got put on the
backburner for a bit, but I’ve now found the time to make enough progress to
On 2017/08/02 4:07, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 12:31 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not sure that's a good idea because the
change says like we might have 'wholerow' only for the FDW case, but that
isn't correct because we would have 'wholerow' for
Hello,
My motivation of this proposal is same as what Robert has. I
understand that ad-hoc option can solve only the part of big problem
and it could be cause of mess. However It seems me that the script
especially for table initialization will not be flexible than we
expected. I mean, even if
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh
> wrote:
>> I'm reading https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/pgupgrade.html to try
>> to understand how to upgrade standby-servers using pg_upgrade with pg10.
>>
>> The text in step 1
Indeed. It doesn't look that hard: AFAICS the problem is just that
process_sql_command() is making premature decisions about whether to
extract parameters from the SQL commands. Proposed patch attached.
Great. Patch looks good to me.
Too me as well: code looks ok, patch applies, compiles,
Thanks Amit for addressing the comment.
The patch looks good to me. I have no more comments.
Verified that v2 patch applies cleanly and make check passes.
Thanks,
Jeevan Ladhe
On 2017/08/03 17:12, Amit Langote wrote:
Attached updated patches.
Thanks for the patch! That looks good to me.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-h
Hi Victor,
> I forgot to attach the patch. Sorry.
> Here it is.
I would say that this patch is in a pretty good shape now. And I see a
99% code coverage of rbtree.c. Let's see what committers think.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Fujita-san,
Thanks for the review.
On 2017/08/03 16:01, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On 2017/08/02 15:21, Amit Langote wrote:
>> On 2017/08/02 1:33, Amit Khandekar wrote:
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Few more comments :
>>>
>>> @@ -1240,7 +1247,7 @@ map_variable_attnos_mutator(Node *node,
>>> var->varlevelsup
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I'll provide another update tomorrow. Hopefully Michael is able to produce
> a 9.6 patch, otherwise I'll do it.
I have sent an updated version of the patch, with something that can
be used for 9.6 as well. It would be nice to get something i
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> Do you need a back-patchable version for 9.6? I could get one out of
>> my pocket if necessary.
>
> I was just trying to find a bit of time to generate exactly that- if
> you have a coupl
On 2017/08/02 15:21, Amit Langote wrote:
Thanks Fuita-san and Amit for reviewing.
On 2017/08/02 1:33, Amit Khandekar wrote:
On 1 August 2017 at 15:11, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2017/07/31 18:56, Amit Langote wrote:
Yes, that's what's needed here. So we need to teach
map_variable_attnos_mutato
91 matches
Mail list logo