On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Amit Khandekar wrote:
> But the statement level trigger function can refer to OLD TABLE and
> NEW TABLE, which will contain all the OLD rows and NEW rows
> respectively. So the updated rows of the partitions (including the
> moved ones) need to be captured. So fo
On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
>
> I rebased the patch to the latest master and also fixed the duplicate OID
> and some slot fixes. Updated patches are attached.
>
While analyzing the removal of HeapScanDesc usage other than heap
modules, The mostly used member is "*rs_cb
On 11 September 2017 at 21:12, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Amit Khandekar
> wrote:
>> On 6 September 2017 at 21:47, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
>> Actually, since transition tables came in, the functions like
>> ExecARUpdateTriggers() or ExecARInsertTriggers() have this addit
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 2:04 AM, Kuntal Ghosh
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Haribabu Kommi
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Attached the latest patch and performance report.
>> >
>> While looking into the patch, I realized that a n
Hi Surafel,
Sorry for that.
Yes. The test case file is forgotten to be added into the previous patch.
Kindly please use the updated patch in the attached file.
Regards,
Jing Wang
Fujitsu Australia
comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.1.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-h
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Jing Wang wrote:
> Please find the rebased patch based on latest version in the attached file.
Hi Jing
It looks like you created dbname.sql and dbname.out files for a
regression test but forgot to "git add" them to your branch before you
created the patch, so "ma
Hello,
At Fri, 08 Sep 2017 16:30:01 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote in
<20170908.163001.53230385.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
> > >> 2017-04-13 12:11:27.065 JST [85441] t/102_vacuumdb_stages.pl
> > >> STATEMENT: ANALYZE;
> > >> 2017-04-13 12:12:25.766 JST [85492] LOG:
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 9/8/17 13:24, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
>> My weapon of choice for LDAP deployments on POSIX-based systems is
>> Arthur De Jong's nss-pam-ldapd (https://arthurdejong.org/nss-pam-ldapd)
>> which is far more flexible than pam_ldap and fixes
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 2:04 AM, Kuntal Ghosh
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Haribabu Kommi
> wrote:
> >
> > Attached the latest patch and performance report.
> >
> While looking into the patch, I realized that a normal backend has to
> check almost 10 if conditions at worst case insid
2017-09-11 22:28 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane :
> Jeevan Chalke writes:
> [ psql-named-arguments-03-jeevan.patch ]
>
> Pushed with minor simplification of the test case.
>
> I'm not quite as convinced as Pavel that this is an improvement ---
> it will make error messages inconsistent between named and unna
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> During my recent work on costing of parallel paths [1], I noticed that
> we are missing to push target list below GatherMerge in some simple
> cases like below.
>
I think this should be considered as a bug-fix for 10.0, but it
doesn't block an
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>> + if (i == InvalidAttrNumber)
>> + ereport(ERROR,
>> + (errcode(ERRCODE_UNDEFINED_COLUMN),
>> +errmsg("column \"%s\" of relation \"%s\" does not
>> exist",
>> +
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm, I don't much like having it silently ignore files that are present;
>> that seems like a foot-gun in the long run. What do you think of the
>> attached?
> That looks good to me. I have tried pretty hard to break
On 2017/09/11 19:45, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Amit Langote wrote:
>> IMHO, we should make it the responsibility of the future patch to set a
>> child PlanRowMark's prti to the direct parent's RT index, when we actually
>> know that it's needed for something. We cle
Hi all,
Right now, PostgresNode.pm uses this set of parameters when initializing a node:
print $conf "\n# Added by PostgresNode.pm\n";
print $conf "fsync = off\n";
print $conf "restart_after_crash = off\n";
print $conf "log_line_prefix = '%m [%p] %q%a '\n";
print $conf "log_sta
Hello Jeff,
Shouldn't we use pg_usleep to ensure portability? it is defined for
front-end code. But it returns void, so the error check will have to be
changed.
Attached v3 with pg_usleep called instead.
I didn't see the problem before the commit I originally indicated , so I
don't think
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hm, I don't much like having it silently ignore files that are present;
> that seems like a foot-gun in the long run. What do you think of the
> attached?
That looks good to me. I have tried pretty hard to break it, but could not.
--
Michael
Hi Surafel,
Please find the rebased patch based on latest version in the attached file.
Regards,
Jing Wang
Fujitsu Australia
comment_on_current_database_for_pgdump_v4.patch
Description: Binary data
comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hac
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:50:51PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 08:12:51AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Well, we could add "MD5 users are encouraged to switch to
> > > SCRAM-SHA-256". Now whether we want to lis
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 08:53:51AM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> "Add AFTER trigger transition tables to record changed rows (Kevin Grittner)"
>>
>> Any chance I could ask for a secondary author credit here?
>
> Sure, done.
Thanks. Can you
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 05:39:31PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Thomas Munro
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> I have committed the first draft of the Postgres 10 release notes. They
> >> are current as of two
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 08:53:51AM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I have committed the first draft of the Postgres 10 release notes. They
> > are current as of two days ago, and I will keep them current. Please
> > give me any feedback you
On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 12:39:43PM +0200, Adrien Nayrat wrote:
> On 07/13/2017 04:36 PM, Adrien Nayrat wrote:
> > Hello hackers,
> >
> > From: Peter Geoghegan
> >> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:19:57 -0700
> >> Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #14722: Segfault in tuplesort_heap_siftup, 32 bit
> >> overflow
>
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 06:30:58PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 04:05:44PM -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
> >> Can you change the attribution on
> >> Allow PL/Tcl functions to return composite types and sets
> >> to Karl Lehenbauer?
>
> > Done and backpatche
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:43 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> So I think this is just an excuse for turning --no-security-labels
> into --no-object-property=security-label. To me, that's just plain
> worse.
It does not seem that my thoughts here have been correctly transmitted
to your brain. I do not m
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 04:05:44PM -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> Can you change the attribution on
>> Allow PL/Tcl functions to return composite types and sets
>> to Karl Lehenbauer?
> Done and backpatched. Sorry for the delay.
I don't see this pushed to the repo?
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> I have committed this patch, after a perltidy run, but the way the libz
> detection was implemented was a bit too hackish for me, so I have
> omitted that for now.
Thanks.
> I think a more robust way would be to parse
> Makefile.global,
On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 04:05:44PM -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 4/24/17 8:31 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >I have committed the first draft of the Postgres 10 release notes. They
> >are current as of two days ago, and I will keep them current. Please
> >give me any feedback you have.
> >
> >The onl
> On 11 September 2017 at 23:45, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> On 11 September 2017 at 23:19, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Uh, what? Sure you can. Just because the existing code never has a
> >> reason to create such a dependency doesn't mean it wouldn't work.
>
Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On 11 September 2017 at 23:19, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Uh, what? Sure you can. Just because the existing code never has a
>> reason to create such a dependency doesn't mean it wouldn't work.
> Well, I thought that `pg_depend` was not intended to be us
Per the discussion in
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20170909064853.25630.12825%40wrigleys.postgresql.org
it seems that our new trigger-transition-table feature isn't
really SQL-spec compliant. Rather than releasing v10 that way,
and then causing compatibility problems when we fix it l
> On 11 September 2017 at 23:19, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Uh, what? Sure you can. Just because the existing code never has a
> reason to create such a dependency doesn't mean it wouldn't work.
Well, I thought that `pg_depend` was not intended to be used from
user-defined
code and it's something "int
Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> writes:
> About dependencies between functions - as far as I understand one cannot
> create a `pg_depend` entry or any other kind of dependencies between
> custom user-defined functions.
Uh, what? Sure you can. Just because the existing code never has a
reas
> On 9 September 2017 at 23:33, Arthur Zakirov
wrote:
> PostgreSQL and documentation with the patch compiles without any errors.
All
> regression tests passed.
Thank you!
> But honestly I still cannot say that I agree with *_extract() and
*_assign()
> functions creation way. For example, there i
On 9/6/17 00:54, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> - I think the tests will fail if libz support is not built. Again,
>> pg_basebackup doesn't have tests for that. So maybe omit that and
>> address it later.
>
> Let's address it now. This can be countered by querying pg_config()
> before running the com
Jeevan Chalke writes:
[ psql-named-arguments-03-jeevan.patch ]
Pushed with minor simplification of the test case.
I'm not quite as convinced as Pavel that this is an improvement ---
it will make error messages inconsistent between named and unnamed
arguments. Still, I follow the point that when
On 9/8/17 21:31, Thomas Munro wrote:
> +if ($^O eq 'darwin')
> +{
> + $slapd = '/usr/local/opt/openldap/libexec/slapd';
> + $ldap_schema_dir = '/usr/local/etc/openldap/schema';
> +}
>
> I'm guessing this is the MacPorts location, and someone from that
> other tribe that uses Brew can e
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Thomas Munro
> wrote:
>>> I attach a patch to remove replacement selection, which I'll submit to CF 1.
>>
>> This breaks the documentation build, because
>> doc/src/sgml/release-9.6.sgml still contains > link
On 9/8/17 13:24, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
> My weapon of choice for LDAP deployments on POSIX-based systems is
> Arthur De Jong's nss-pam-ldapd (https://arthurdejong.org/nss-pam-ldapd)
> which is far more flexible than pam_ldap and fixes a large number of
> bugs, including the tendency for pam_ldap
2017-09-11 20:46 GMT+02:00 Fabien COELHO :
>
> I think you're overly optimistic to believe that every failure will
have a SQLSTATE; I don't think that's true for libpq-reported errors,
such as connection loss.
>>>
>> Yep, I thought I was optimistic:-) Can I add a special SQLSTATE fo
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 1:49 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Hello Jeff,
>
> Ok, the problem was a little bit more trivial than I thought.
>
> The issue is that under a low rate there may be no transaction in
> progress, however the wait procedure was relying on select's timeout. If
> nothing is act
On 09/11/2017 01:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
>> On 09/08/2017 09:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Like you, I'm a bit worried about the code for extracting an exit
>>> status from IPC::Run::run. We'll have to keep an eye on the buildfarm
>>> for a bit. If there's any trouble, I'd
On 9/7/17 14:53, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> On 9/5/17 15:32, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I do agree with the idea that we should use the * notation in cases where
>>> the reader might otherwise think that a plain function was being invoked,
>>> ie I don't like
>>> some_function_pointer(
I think you're overly optimistic to believe that every failure will
have a SQLSTATE; I don't think that's true for libpq-reported errors,
such as connection loss.
Yep, I thought I was optimistic:-) Can I add a special SQLSTATE for that
situation where libpq did not report an error?
Meh. If
On 9/10/17 12:14, 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:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2017040
Fabien COELHO writes:
>> I think you're overly optimistic to believe that every failure will
>> have a SQLSTATE; I don't think that's true for libpq-reported errors,
>> such as connection loss.
> Yep, I thought I was optimistic:-) Can I add a special SQLSTATE for that
> situation where libpq did
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 09/08/2017 09:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Like you, I'm a bit worried about the code for extracting an exit
>> status from IPC::Run::run. We'll have to keep an eye on the buildfarm
>> for a bit. If there's any trouble, I'd be inclined to drop it down
>> to just success/
Hello Tom,
Hm. Looking closer at this, I see that it doesn't work so well after all
to put the variable-setting code in ProcessResult:
that fails to cover the ExecQueryUsingCursor code path.
Ok, I'll investigate this path.
And it also fails to cover DescribeQuery, which arguably should set
On 09/08/2017 09:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Fabien COELHO writes:
>> [ pgbench-tap-12.patch ]
> Pushed, with some minor fooling with comments and after running it
> through perltidy. (I have no opinions about Perl code formatting,
> but perltidy does ...)
>
> The only substantive change I made wa
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Tatsuro Yamada
> wrote:
>> Thanks for the comment.
>>
>> As you know, CLUSTER command uses SEQ SCAN or INDEX SCAN as a scan method by
>> cost estimation. In the case of SEQ SCAN, these two phases not overlap.
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>> The question is what is the optimal replacement_sort_tuples value? I
>> assume it's the number of tuples that effectively uses CPU caches, at
>> least that's what our docs say. So I th
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 4:17 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote:
> > >> Rebased 0002 against this commit & renamed to 0001, PFA.
> > >
> > > Given that we have default partition support now, I am wondering
> > > whether ha
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:47 AM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> The question is what is the optimal replacement_sort_tuples value?
See my remarks to Robert just now.
I think that it's incredibly hard to set replacement_sort_tuples
sensibly in 9.6. As of Postgres 10, it is much more likely to hurt
than to
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:32 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> To be clear, you'll still need to set replacement_sort_tuples high
>> when testing RS, to make sure that we really use it for at least the
>> first run when we're expected to. (There i
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
>
> Attached the latest patch and performance report.
>
While looking into the patch, I realized that a normal backend has to
check almost 10 if conditions at worst case inside XLogWrite(6 in
am_background_process method, 1 for write, 1 for blo
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> Overall I think the results show quite significant positive impact of
> the patch. There are a few cases of regression, but ISTM those may
> easily be noise as it's usually 0.03 vs 0.04 second, or something. I'll
> switch to the \timing (inste
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> The question is what is the optimal replacement_sort_tuples value? I
> assume it's the number of tuples that effectively uses CPU caches, at
> least that's what our docs say. So I think you're right it to 1B rows
> may break this assumption,
On 2017-09-11 02:12, Thomas Munro wrote:
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
Thomas Munro has hacked up a prototype of application testing
automatically if patches submitted apply and build:
http://commitfest.cputube.org/
I should add: this is a spare-time effort, a work-
On 09/11/2017 05:32 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> To be clear, you'll still need to set replacement_sort_tuples high
>> when testing RS, to make sure that we really use it for at least the
>> first run when we're expected to. (There is no easy
Fabien COELHO writes:
> Small v7 update, sorry for the noise.
Hm. Looking closer at this, I see that it doesn't work so well after all
to put the variable-setting code in ProcessResult: that fails to cover the
ExecQueryUsingCursor code path. And it also fails to cover DescribeQuery,
which argua
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Amit Khandekar wrote:
> On 6 September 2017 at 21:47, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> Actually, since transition tables came in, the functions like
> ExecARUpdateTriggers() or ExecARInsertTriggers() have this additional
> purpose of capturing transition table rows, so that
On 09/11/2017 03:01 PM, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> Hi Tomas,
>
>>> Unless there are any objections to give this idea a try I'm willing to
>>> write and host a corresponding script.
>>>
>> That won't work until (2) is reliable enough. There are patches
>> (for example my "multivariate MCV lists
On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> To be clear, you'll still need to set replacement_sort_tuples high
> when testing RS, to make sure that we really use it for at least the
> first run when we're expected to. (There is no easy way to have
> testing mechanically verify that w
Hi,
On 09/08/2017 03:35 PM, Sokolov Yura wrote:
I'm seeing
-M prepared: Up to 11% improvement
-M prepared -S: No improvement, no regression ("noise")
-M prepared -N: Up to 12% improvement
for all runs the improvement shows up the closer you get to the number
of CPU threads, or above. Although
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 12:38 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The specific case we need to allow is "ENOENT on a file/dir that was
>> there a moment ago". I think it still behooves us to complain about
>> anything else. If you think it's a simple fix, have at it. But
>> I see
On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> As there begins to be many switches of this kind and much code
>> duplication, I think that some refactoring into a more generic switch
>> infrastructure would be nicer.
>
> I have been
On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Tatsuro Yamada
wrote:
> Thanks for the comment.
>
> As you know, CLUSTER command uses SEQ SCAN or INDEX SCAN as a scan method by
> cost estimation. In the case of SEQ SCAN, these two phases not overlap.
> However, in INDEX SCAN, it overlaps. Therefore I created th
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:07 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> I see the same thing when I use prepare and execute
Hmm. Well, that's good, but it doesn't prove there's no bug. We have
to understand where and why it's getting locked to know whether the
behavior will be correct in all cases. I haven't
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> How difficult/tedious/troublesome would be to install the missing
> partitions if you set hash partitioning with a default partition and
> only later on notice that some partitions are missing? I think if the
> answer is that you need to ex
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Amit Khandekar wrote:
> On 8 September 2017 at 19:17, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
>> In that case, why can't we keep the workers also process in same
>> order, what is the harm in that?
>
> Because of the way the logic of queuing works, the workers finish
> earlier if t
On 2017/08/17 17:27, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2017/07/11 6:56, Robert Haas wrote:
I have to admit that I'm a little bit fuzzy about why foreign insert
routing requires all of these changes. I think this patch would
benefit from being accompanied by several paragraphs of explanation
outlining the
Hi Tomas,
> > Unless there are any objections to give this idea a try I'm willing to
> > write and host a corresponding script.
> >
> That won't work until (2) is reliable enough. There are patches (for
> example my "multivariate MCV lists and histograms") which fails to apply
> only because the
On 09/11/2017 01:54 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 5:33 AM, Ildus Kurbangaliev
> wrote:
>> Moreover, RUM index
>> stores positions + lexemes, so it doesn't need tsvectors for ranked
>> search. As a result, tsvector becomes a storage for
>> building indexes (indexable type), not s
On 09/11/2017 11:41 AM, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Great job!
>
+1
> Here is a crazy idea. What if we write a script that would automatically
> return the patches that:
>
> 1) Are not in "Waiting on Author" status
> 2) Don't apply OR don't pass `make installcheck-world`
>
>
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 9/8/17 13:14, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> 2. Allow a SET to apply only for a single statement
>> SET guc1 = x, guc2 = y FOR stmt
>> e.g. SET max_parallel_workers = 4 FOR SELECT count(*) FROM bigtable
>> Internally a GUC setting already exists for a single use, via
>> GUC_AC
On 9/8/17 13:14, Simon Riggs wrote:
> 2. Allow a SET to apply only for a single statement
> SET guc1 = x, guc2 = y FOR stmt
> e.g. SET max_parallel_workers = 4 FOR SELECT count(*) FROM bigtable
> Internally a GUC setting already exists for a single use, via
> GUC_ACTION_SAVE, so we just need to inv
2017-09-11 9:46 GMT+02:00 Jeevan Chalke :
> Hi Pavel,
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Pavel Stehule
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> 2017-09-08 9:36 GMT+02:00 Jeevan Chalke :
>>
>>> Hi Pavel,
>>> I like the idea of using parameter name instead of $n symbols.
>>>
>>> However, I am slightly worried th
Andres Freund writes:
> One large user of unnecessary non-constant static variables is
> numeric.c. More out of curiosity - numeric is slow enough in itself to
> make inlining not a huge win - I converted it to use consts.
LGTM.
> It's a bit ugly that some consts have to be casted away in the c
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:45 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
>> So, all partitioned partitions are getting locked correctly. Am I
>> missing something?
>
> That's not a valid test. In that scenario, you're going to hold all
> the locks acquired b
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 4:17 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> >> Rebased 0002 against this commit & renamed to 0001, PFA.
> >
> > Given that we have default partition support now, I am wondering
> > whether hash partitioned tables also should have default partitions.
> > The way
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 5:33 AM, Ildus Kurbangaliev
wrote:
> Moreover, RUM index
> stores positions + lexemes, so it doesn't need tsvectors for ranked
> search. As a result, tsvector becomes a storage for
> building indexes (indexable type), not something that should be used at
> runtime. And the
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:45 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> So, all partitioned partitions are getting locked correctly. Am I
> missing something?
That's not a valid test. In that scenario, you're going to hold all
the locks acquired by the planner, all the locks acquired by the
rewriter, and all t
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 4:17 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>> Rebased 0002 against this commit & renamed to 0001, PFA.
>
> Given that we have default partition support now, I am wondering
> whether hash partitioned tables also should have default partitions.
> The way we have structured hash partition
Re: To Andres Freund 2017-09-11 <20170911095338.mqkiinkpk7gko...@msg.df7cb.de>
> Re: Andres Freund 2017-09-11
> <20170911090306.s7sj4uyr4t72w...@alap3.anarazel.de>
> > Could you pprint() the expression that's being initialized?
> (gdb) p pprint(node)
Andres helped me to produce a correct dump, my
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Great job!
>
> Here is a crazy idea. What if we write a script that would automatically
> return the patches that:
>
> 1) Are not in "Waiting on Author" status
> 2) Don't apply OR don't pass `make installcheck-world`
>
>
On 8 September 2017 at 19:17, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Amit Khandekar wrote:
>> On 7 September 2017 at 11:05, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Amit Khandekar
>>> wrote:
>>> 3.
>>> +/* --
Thanks Rafia, Amit, now I understand the ideas behind the patch better.
I'll see if I can look at the new one.
--
Alexander Kuzmenkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make c
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Amit Langote
wrote:
> On 2017/09/11 16:23, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 6:28 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I'm a bit suspicious about the fact that there are now executor
>>> changes related to the PlanRowMarks. If the rowmark's prti is now the
>>
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Amit Langote
wrote:
> On 2017/09/09 2:38, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> I updated the patch to include just those changes. I'm not sure about
>>> one of the Ashutosh's changes whereby the child PlanRowMark is al
Hi,
I planned to do some benchmarking on this patch, but apparently the
patch no longer applies. Rebase please?
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pg
> 11 сент. 2017 г., в 12:57, Dmitriy Sarafannikov
> написал(а):
> Hi Andrew! Thanks for the patch, but patch
> 0001-allow-uncompressed-Gist-2.patch no longer applies on current master
> branch.
> Please could you rebase it?
Sure, see attachment. Thanks for looking into the patch!
Best regards
Hi Amit,
On 2017/09/11 16:16, Amit Khandekar wrote:
> Thanks Amit for the patch. I am still reviewing it, but meanwhile
> below are a few comments so far ...
Thanks for the review.
> + next_parted_idx += (list_length(*pds) - next_parted_idx - 1);
>
> I think this can be replaced just by :
> +
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> I have prepared separate patches for hash and btree index. I think
>> for another type of indexes, it is better to first fix the pd_lower
>> issue.
>
> Just wondering (sorry I have n
Re: Andres Freund 2017-09-11 <20170911090306.s7sj4uyr4t72w...@alap3.anarazel.de>
> Could you pprint() the expression that's being initialized?
(gdb) f 4
#4 0x5604ecedd124 in ExecInitNode (node=node@entry=0x5604ee884f80,
estate=estate@entry=0x5604ee8c78a0,
eflags=eflags@entry=16) at
./b
Hi Thomas,
Great job!
Here is a crazy idea. What if we write a script that would automatically
return the patches that:
1) Are not in "Waiting on Author" status
2) Don't apply OR don't pass `make installcheck-world`
... to the "Waiting on Author" status and describe the problem through
the "Add
Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > Finally, as vertical scrolling is mandatory, I would be fine with
> > skipping lines with entries for readability, but it is just a matter of
> > taste and I expect there should be half a dozen different opinions on
> > the matter of formatting.
>
> FWIW, +1 to extra lines
On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 23:08:14 +0200
Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 08/17/2017 12:23 PM, Ildus Kurbangaliev wrote:
> > In my benchmarks when database fits into buffers (so it's
> > measurement of the time required for the tsvectors conversion) it
> > gives me these results:
> >
> > Without conve
On 09.09.2017 06:35, Thomas Munro wrote:
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 3:54 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik
wrote:
Attached please find rebased version of the autoprepare patch based on Tom's
proposal (perform analyze for tree with constant literals and then replace
them with parameters).
Also I submitted
Hi Tom,
> In short, therefore, I propose we rip out the DirectWalk and InvertedWalk
> options along with their support code, and then drop the portions of
> test_rbtree that are needed to exercise them. Any objections?
Doesn't sound like something that will be used any time soon. When and
if it
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Amit Langote
wrote:
> On 2017/09/10 15:22, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 5:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo