Svenne == Svenne Krap sve...@krap.dk writes:
Svenne I have the explains,
Can you post the explain analyze outputs?
If need be, you can anonymize the table and column names and any
identifiers by using the anonymization option of explain.depesz.com, but
please only do that if you actually need
Oh, and I build it on top of f92fc4c95ddcc25978354a8248d3df22269201bc
On 20-04-2015 10:36, Svenne Krap wrote:
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, failed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant:
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, failed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:tested, passed
Hi,
I have (finally) found time to review this.
The syntax
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 2:26 PM, 彭瑞华 ruihua.p...@163.com wrote:
I am using postgesql 9.4.0. Thanks for your great work on grouping sets
patch effort.
I am now compiling postgresql from source code 9.4.0 on Linux platform with
[gsp-all.patch] successed and grouping function well, but failed on
ok, I will try it using git master branch source code. thanks! Of course, using
gsp-all-latest.patch this time.
At 2015-04-12 14:23:46, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 2:26 PM, 彭瑞华 ruihua.p...@163.com wrote:
I am using postgesql 9.4.0. Thanks for your
Dear:
I am using postgesql 9.4.0. Thanks for your great work on grouping sets patch
effort.
I am now compiling postgresql from source code 9.4.0 on Linux platform with
[gsp-all.patch] successed and grouping function well, but failed on window
platform(windows 2003 or window 7).
It shows
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 18-03-2015 17:18, Svenne Krap wrote:
I still need to check against the standard and I will run it against a
non-trivival production load... hopefully I will finish up my review
shortly after the weekend...
I am still on it, but a little
Svenne == Svenne Krap sve...@krap.dk writes:
Svenne I still need to check against the standard and I will run it
Svenne against a non-trivival production load... hopefully I will
Svenne finish up my review shortly after the weekend...
Thanks for the review so far; any progress? I'm quite
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, failed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:tested, passed
This is a midway review, a later will complete it.
The patch
Patch from message (87d24iukc5@news-spur.riddles.org.uk) fails (tried to
apply on top of ebc0f5e01d2f ), as b55722692 has broken up the line (in
src/backend/optimizer/util/pathnode.c):
pathnode-path.rows = estimate_num_groups(root, uniq_exprs, rel-rows);
After patching the added parameter
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Heikki Uh, that's ugly. The EXPLAIN out I mean; as an implementation
Heikki detail chaining the nodes might be reasonable. But the above
Heikki
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-09-09 16:01 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Heikki
2014-09-09 16:01 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Heikki Uh, that's ugly. The EXPLAIN out I mean; as an implementation
Heikki
Robert == Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Robert Sure, showing the sort and aggregation steps is fine. But I
Robert don't see what advantage we get out of showing them like
Robert this:
Robert Aggregate
Robert - Sort
Robert- ChainAggregate
Robert - Sort
Robert
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Honestly, ChainAggregate is _trivial_ compared to trying to make the
GroupAggregate code deal with multiple inputs, or trying to make some
new sort of plumbing node to
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Robert == Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Robert Sure, showing the sort and aggregation steps is fine. But I
Robert don't see what advantage we get out of showing them like
Robert this:
Robert
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Honestly, ChainAggregate is _trivial_ compared to trying to make the
GroupAggregate code deal with multiple inputs, or trying to make some
new sort of plumbing node to feed input to those sorts. (You'd think
that it should be possible to use
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
If you look at the latest patch post, there's a small patch in it that
does nothing but unreserve the keywords and fix ruleutils to make
deparse/parse work. The required fix to ruleutils is an example of
Robert == Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Robert I can accept ugly code, but I feel strongly that we shouldn't
Robert accept ugly semantics. Forcing cube to get out of the way
Robert may not be pretty, but I think it will be much worse if we
Robert violate the rule that quoting a
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Tom Perhaps so. I would really prefer not to have to get into
Tom estimating how many people will be inconvenienced how badly.
Tom It's clear to me that not a lot of sweat has been put into
Tom seeing if we can avoid reserving the keyword, and I
* Andrew Gierth (and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk) wrote:
Having now spent some more time looking, I believe there is a solution
which makes it unreserved which does not require any significant pain
in the code. I'm not entirely convinced that this is the right
approach in the long term, but it
Andrew Gierth wrote:
(This of course means that if someone has a cube() function call in
a group by clause of a view, then upgrading will change the meaning
of the view and possibly fail to create it; there seems to be no fix
for this, not even using the latest pg_dump, since pg_dump relies
Alvaro == Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
(This of course means that if someone has a cube() function call
in a group by clause of a view, then upgrading will change the
meaning of the view and possibly fail to create it; there seems to
be no fix for this, not even using
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Andrew Gierth and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk writes:
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Tom I wonder if you've tried hard enough to avoid reserving the keyword.
GROUP BY cube(a,b) is currently legal syntax and means
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Well, if there are any extant applications that use that exact phrasing,
they're going to be broken in any case. That does not mean that we have
to break every other appearance of
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
So the proposal you are pushing is going
to result in seriously teeing off some fraction of our userbase;
and the argument why that would be acceptable seems to boil down to
I think there are few enough of them that we don't
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Well, if there are any extant applications that use that exact phrasing,
they're going to be broken in any case.
On 08/22/2014 02:42 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
So the proposal you are pushing is going
to result in seriously teeing off some fraction of our userbase;
and the argument why that would be acceptable seems to boil down to
I think
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MT2gzzbyWpw
At around 8 minutes, he shows utilization statistics for cube at
around 1% across their install base.
* Andrew Dunstan (and...@dunslane.net) wrote:
On 08/22/2014 02:42 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
So the proposal you are pushing is going
to result in seriously teeing off some fraction of our userbase;
and the argument why that
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 10:37 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Agreed- and how many of those have *every extension available* loaded...
Actually that was also in the talk.a few slides later. 0.7%
--
greg
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To
* Greg Stark (st...@mit.edu) wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 10:37 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Agreed- and how many of those have *every extension available* loaded...
Actually that was also in the talk.a few slides later. 0.7%
So, 0.3% install cube w/o installing *every*
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Tom I'm not convinced of that; I think some creative hackery in the
Tom grammar might be able to deal with this.
Making GROUP BY CUBE(a,b) parse as grouping sets rather than as a
function turned out to be the easy part: give CUBE a lower precedence
On 08/13/2014 09:43 PM, Atri Sharma wrote:
Sorry, forgot to attach the patch for fixing cube in contrib, which breaks
since we now reserve cube keyword. Please find attached the same.
Ugh, that will make everyone using the cube extension unhappy. After
this patch, they will have to quote
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
On 08/13/2014 09:43 PM, Atri Sharma wrote:
Sorry, forgot to attach the patch for fixing cube in contrib,
which breaks since we now reserve cube keyword. Please find
attached the same.
Heikki Ugh, that will make everyone using
A progress update:
Atri We envisage that handling of arbitrary grouping sets will be
Atri best done by having the planner generating an Append of
Atri multiple aggregation paths, presumably with some way of moving
Atri the original input path to a CTE. We have not really explored
Atri yet
On 08/21/2014 01:28 PM, Andrew Gierth wrote:
A progress update:
Atri We envisage that handling of arbitrary grouping sets will be
Atri best done by having the planner generating an Append of
Atri multiple aggregation paths, presumably with some way of moving
Atri the original input
Andrew Gierth and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk writes:
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Heikki I think we should bite the bullet and rename the extension,
I agree, the contrib/cube patch as posted is purely so we could test
everything without having to argue over the
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Heikki Uh, that's ugly. The EXPLAIN out I mean; as an implementation
Heikki detail chaining the nodes might be reasonable. But the above
Heikki gets unreadable if you have more than a few grouping sets.
It's good for highlighting
2014-08-21 17:00 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Andrew Gierth and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk writes:
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Heikki I think we should bite the bullet and rename the extension,
I agree, the contrib/cube patch as posted is purely so
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
I agree, the contrib/cube patch as posted is purely so we could test
everything without having to argue over the new name first.
Tom I wonder if you've tried hard enough to avoid reserving the keyword.
GROUP BY cube(a,b) is currently legal
2014-08-21 17:58 GMT+02:00 Andrew Gierth and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk:
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
I agree, the contrib/cube patch as posted is purely so we could test
everything without having to argue over the new name first.
Tom I wonder if you've tried hard enough to
Andrew Gierth and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk writes:
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Tom I wonder if you've tried hard enough to avoid reserving the keyword.
GROUP BY cube(a,b) is currently legal syntax and means something completely
incompatible to what the spec requires.
Well, if
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Andrew Gierth and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk writes:
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Tom I wonder if you've tried hard enough to avoid reserving the keyword.
GROUP BY cube(a,b) is currently legal syntax and means
On 08/21/2014 02:48 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
Basically, I'm afraid that unilaterally renaming cube is going to break
enough applications that there will be more people who flat out don't
want this patch than there will be who get benefit from it, and we end
up voting to revert the feature
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
I'm inclined to think that the audience for this is far larger than the
audience for the cube extension, which I have not once encountered in
the field.
Perhaps so. I would really prefer not to have to get into estimating
how many people will be
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
I'm inclined to think that the audience for this is far larger than the
audience for the cube extension, which I have not once encountered in
the field.
+1
Perhaps so. I would really prefer not to have
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 06:15:33PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
I'm inclined to think that the audience for this is far larger than the
audience for the cube extension, which I have not once encountered in
Stephen == Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
I'm inclined to think that the audience for this is far larger
than the audience for the cube extension, which I have not once
encountered in the field.
Stephen +1
Most of my encounters with cube have been me suggesting it to people
on
49 matches
Mail list logo
