Re: [HACKERS] ECPG: WHENEVER statement with DO CONTINUE action

On Aug 25, 2017 10:45 PM, "Michael Meskes" <mes...@postgresql.org> wrote: > > > The v3 patch looks good to me. I've changed this patch status to Ready > > for Committer. > > Thank you all, committed. Thank you very much. Regards, Vinayak Pokale

Re: [HACKERS] ECPG: WHENEVER statement with DO CONTINUE action

. Thanks for bringing it to our attention and > fixing this missing functionality. > > > I have tried to implement it. Please check the attached patch. > > Please give me feedback. > > ... > > Could you please add a "DO CONTINUE" case to one of the test cases? Or > add a new one? We would need a test case IMO. > Yes I will add test case and send updated patch. Regards, Vinayak Pokale

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] New command to monitor progression of long running queries

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:09 PM, Remi Colinet wrote: > Hello, > > I've implemented a new command named PROGRESS to monitor progression of > long running SQL queries in a backend process. > > Thank you for the patch. I am testing your patch but after applying your patch

Re: [HACKERS] Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: tested, passed Spec compliant: tested, passed Documentation:tested, passed I have tested the latest patch and it looks good to me, so I

Re: [HACKERS] Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers

. Suggestions and comments are helpful to implement this feature. Regards, Vinayak Pokale On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > > > > > Here's updated patch. I didn't use

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

Hello, On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > > Hi Vinayak, > > Thanks for updating the patch! A quick comment: > > On 2016/02/26 17:28, poku...@pm.nttdata.co.jp wrote: > >> CREATE VIEW pg_stat_vacuum_progress AS > >> SELECT S.s[1] as pid, > >>

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

Hi, Please find attached updated patch with an updated interface. On Jan 26, 2016 11:22 AM, "Vinayak Pokale" <vinpok...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Amit, > > Thank you for reviewing the patch. > > On Jan 26, 2016 9:51 AM, "Amit Langote" <langote_amit.

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

which are called at the beginning: void pgstat_report_progress_set_command_target(Oid relid) Regards, Vinayak On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Amit Langote <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp > wrote: > On 2016/01/12 11:28, Vinayak Pokale wrote: > > On Jan 12, 2016 11:22 AM

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

Hi Amit, Thank you for reviewing the patch. On Jan 26, 2016 9:51 AM, "Amit Langote" <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > > > Hi Vinayak, > > On 2016/01/25 20:58, Vinayak Pokale wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Please find attached updated patch with

[HACKERS] Typo in sequence.c

Hi, I found a typo in sequence.c Please check the attached patch. Regards, Vinayak typo-sequence-c.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

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

omments in [1]. > > I meant to say "originally proposed pgstat interface on this thread". Yes. Robert's comments related to pgstat interface needs to be address. I will update it. Regards, Vinayak Pokale

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

hen > I switched to a unprivileged user. > In the previous patch, it is showing in phase > column. Yes. I will update the patch. Regards, Vinayak Pokale

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

D_LAZY_VACUUM. Added documentation for view. Some more comments need to be addressed. Regards, Vinayak Pokale On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 1:25 AM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >