postgres-xc-developers — Postgres-XC hackers and developers

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Fix for xc_FQS_join regression

[鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>]

Sorry for bothering.   This time, I only applied  num_nodes off only to the statement which is shipped to more than one datanode.  There was two of them.

Hope this makes sense.

Regards;
---
Koichi Suzuki


On 2013/05/15, at 15:04, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:

> Hi Suzuki-san,
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:15 AM, 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...> wrote:
> I see.   PFA the revised patch.   Some num_node off was missing in explain statements.  They're fixed too.
> 
> 
> 
> You need to apply changes only to the queries which are showing diffs because of difference in number of nodes. But it seems you have changed all the explain commands in the file. That's not needed.
> 
> As I said in my previous mail, there are some explain outputs where the query is shipped to only one node and the node count in explain output will be always 1 for such queries. That doesn't change with the cluster configuration. For such queries, it's important that we have num_nodes off.
>  
> ---
> Koichi Suzuki
> 
> 
> 
> On 2013/05/15, at 13:17, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:
> 
>> That's not a correct fix. We should turn off the node count in Explain output. Use EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) as a general rule. In case of single node reduction tests, we may use num_nodes on, but in that case num_nodes will always be 1, and will not change depending upon cluster configuration.
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...> wrote:
>> I found the regression failure was due to the change of explain output.   Original expected output uses node count = 3, which is not correct because regression test is configured with only two datanode.   Actual result says node count = 2 which is correct.
>> 
>> Attached is a patch for the correction.
>> 
>> Regards;
>> ----------
>> Koichi Suzuki
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Best Wishes,
>> Ashutosh Bapat
>> EntepriseDB Corporation
>> The Postgres Database Company
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EntepriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] xc_sort regression failure fix

[鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>]

Here's third try.

I just left all the explain with (….) option as is and just added (verbose on, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) option to only one explain statement which simply issued explain verbose.

Hope this patch makes sense.
---
Koichi Suzuki


On 2013/05/15, at 16:33, 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...> wrote:

> Verbose appeared in the old files.  Should I remove all the "verbose"?
> 
> Regards;
> ---
> Koichi Suzuki
> 
> 
> 
> On 2013/05/15, at 14:58, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Suzuki-san,
>> There are syntax errors in expected output in your patch. The right way to invoke EXPLAIN is
>> EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) <query>
>> 
>> In your patch it is used as 
>> EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) verbose <query>
>> that's why it's giving syntax error.
>> 
>> Also, you have use cost off instead of costs off.
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:01 AM, 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...> wrote:
>> Here's the second fix.
>> 
>> Regards;
>> ---
>> Koichi Suzuki
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 2013/05/15, at 13:22, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:
>> 
>>> Again in this case, the right fix is to use the standard EXPLAIN form EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off).
>>> 
>>> What I don't understand is how come these changes appeared suddenly?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...> wrote:
>>> Hello;
>>> 
>>> This failure was caused by the following:
>>> 
>>> 1. Now FQS pushes down order by and there're no sort at coordinator.  Current regression did not reflect this.
>>> 
>>> 2. Regression test changed the datanode name.  Current regression did not reflect this.
>>> 
>>> Enclosed is a fix.
>>> 
>>> Regards;
>>> ----------
>>> Koichi Suzuki
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>>> Pos...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Best Wishes,
>>> Ashutosh Bapat
>>> EntepriseDB Corporation
>>> The Postgres Database Company
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
>>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>>> Pos...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Best Wishes,
>> Ashutosh Bapat
>> EntepriseDB Corporation
>> The Postgres Database Company
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] xc_sort regression failure fix

[鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>]

Verbose appeared in the old files.  Should I remove all the "verbose"?

Regards;
---
Koichi Suzuki



On 2013/05/15, at 14:58, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:

> Hi Suzuki-san,
> There are syntax errors in expected output in your patch. The right way to invoke EXPLAIN is
> EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) <query>
> 
> In your patch it is used as 
> EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) verbose <query>
> that's why it's giving syntax error.
> 
> Also, you have use cost off instead of costs off.
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:01 AM, 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...> wrote:
> Here's the second fix.
> 
> Regards;
> ---
> Koichi Suzuki
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2013/05/15, at 13:22, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:
> 
>> Again in this case, the right fix is to use the standard EXPLAIN form EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off).
>> 
>> What I don't understand is how come these changes appeared suddenly?
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...> wrote:
>> Hello;
>> 
>> This failure was caused by the following:
>> 
>> 1. Now FQS pushes down order by and there're no sort at coordinator.  Current regression did not reflect this.
>> 
>> 2. Regression test changed the datanode name.  Current regression did not reflect this.
>> 
>> Enclosed is a fix.
>> 
>> Regards;
>> ----------
>> Koichi Suzuki
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Best Wishes,
>> Ashutosh Bapat
>> EntepriseDB Corporation
>> The Postgres Database Company
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EntepriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company

[Postgres-xc-developers] COPY and BR triggers

[Amit K. <ami...@en...>]

In XC, the way COPY is implemented is that for each record, we read the
whole line into memory, and then pass it to the datanode as-is. If there
are non-shippable default column expressions, we evaluate the default
values , convert them into output form, and append them to the data row.

In presence of BR triggers, currently the ExecBRInsertTriggers() do not get
called because of the way we skip the whole PG code block; instead we just
send the data row as-is, optionally appending default values into the data
row.

What we need to do is; convert the tuple returned by ExecBRTriggers into
text data row, but the text data should be in COPY format. This is because
we need to send the data row to the datanode using COPY command, so it
requires correct COPY format, such as escape sequences.

For this, we need to call the function CopyOneRowTo() that is being used by
COPY TO. This will make sure it will emit the data row in the COPY format.
But we need to create a temporary CopyState because CopyOneRowTo() needs
it. We can derive it from the current CopyState that is already created for
COPY FROM. Most of the fields remain the same, except we need to re-assign
CopyState->line_buf, and CopyState->rowcontext.

This will save us from writing code to make sure the new output data row
generated by BR triggers complies with COPY data format.

I had already done similar thing for appending default values into the data
row. We call functions like CopyAttributeOutCSV(), CopyInt32() to append
the values to the data row in COPY format. There, we did not require
CopyOneRow() because we did not require the complete row, we needed to
append only a subset of columns to the existing data row.

Comments/suggestions welcome.

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Patch for trigger shippability

[Ashutosh B. <ash...@en...>]

Hi Amit,
Here are comment on trig_shippability patch.

1. The function pgxc_trigevent_quickfind() needs a better name like
pgxc_has_trigger_for_event() to convey the functionality clearly.
 2. The prologue of function pgxc_should_exec_triggers() has all the
necessary content, but it needs to be written in a better order. The
prologue talks about a single trigger (to be executed) but in reality the
function is executed for checking whether all the triggers matching the
given criteria and belonging to a given relation are firable or not. The
prologue needs to be corrected. Also, first specify why is such a check
needed (trigger order being alphabetical makes it necessary that all or
none of the triggers execute on the same node).
3. pgxc_is_inttrigger_firable(), the function name needs to change a bit.
The int in inttrigger can be easily associated with integer instead of
internal. Can you please change the name to use internal_ or intern_
instead of int. If the name becomes too long, please use suitable prefix.
4. RemoteQueryNext() is called multiple times; the after statement triggers
too will be called those many times. Right now this does not happen since
there is no way the function will be called multiple times for a DML. But
in future, we will start supporting RETURNING with FQS, in which case
RemoteQueryNext will be called multiple times.

test xc_trigship

1. we are using same name xc_auditlog for table and function. Please use
different names.
2. For every object (table/function etc) that the test creates, please
mention the purpose of that object. That helps validating the object
definition there and there itself.
 3. I couldn't understand, how does the test check where the trigger is
being fired?



On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <
ash...@en...> wrote:

> Hi Amit,
> We now have Query structure in RemoteQuery. This corresponds to the query
> being fired on the datanodes. THe commandType here should tell you whether
> it's DELETE or not.
>
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Amit Khandekar <
> ami...@en...> wrote:
>
>> In case of multiple triggers of the same type for a given table, the
>> requirement is that they should be fired in alphabetical order. To do so,
>> we need to fire either all of them on coordinator, or all of them on
>> datanode. The main changes in the attached patch are related to this
>> requirement.
>>
>> All of the Exec*Trigger() functions now execute should_exec_trigger*()
>> functions that return true if the node on which they are run is the right
>> node to execute those type of triggers.
>>
>> Also for BR triggers, the additional requirement is that they should be
>> run on coordinator if AR triggers are not shippable, regardless of whether
>> BR themselves are shippable or not. This is because, if we fire BR triggers
>> on datanode, they might change the final row updated, and so we need to
>> again fetch the new row back to the coordinator. Instead, if we fire them
>> on coordinator, we already know what's the final row. Also, we would have
>> required additional changes to add RETURNING to the remote query to fetch
>> the final updated row.
>>
>> Constraint triggers are exception; we need to fire them always on
>> datanode. Once we support global constraints, these need not be specially
>> handled.
>>
>> I was trying to avoid the should_exec_trigger*() calls for each of the
>> Exec*Trigger() functions by doing this in TriggerEnabled() because it is a
>> common function called for all triggers. But the issue is, for AFTER
>> triggers, it is called with a different set of  event type values than the
>> usual  TRIGGER_TYPE* values. For AFTER triggers, TRIGGER_EVENT_* values are
>> used. Anyways, TriggerEnabled() is called for each of the trigger.
>>
>> The trigger shippability helper functions are now completely changed.
>> pgxc_find_nonshippable_row_trig() is the key function. The comments in
>> these functions should give a fair idea of their functionality.
>>
>>
>> For stmt shippability, the trigger functions are now explicitly called if
>> it's not an internally generated query. rq_internal_params field is used to
>> know that this DML is user-supplied query (that is, it would be FQS). The
>> functions are called in RemoteQueryNext().
>>
>>
>> THere is another patch (relaccess_type.patch) that you need to first
>> apply before the main patch (trig_shippability.patch) is applied. I had to
>> add another RELATION_ACCESS_DELETE in ExecNodes. To handle the stmt
>> triggers, I had to know whether the statement is DELETE or INSERT or UPDATE.
>>
>> The new test xc_trigship is added.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
>> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
>> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EntepriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
>



-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EntepriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Fix for xc_FQS_join regression

[Ashutosh B. <ash...@en...>]

Hi Suzuki-san,



On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:15 AM, 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...> wrote:

> I see.   PFA the revised patch.   Some num_node off was missing in explain
> statements.  They're fixed too.
>
>
>
You need to apply changes only to the queries which are showing diffs
because of difference in number of nodes. But it seems you have changed all
the explain commands in the file. That's not needed.

As I said in my previous mail, there are some explain outputs where the
query is shipped to only one node and the node count in explain output will
be always 1 for such queries. That doesn't change with the cluster
configuration. For such queries, it's important that we have num_nodes off.


> ---
> Koichi Suzuki
>
>
>
> On 2013/05/15, at 13:17, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...>
> wrote:
>
> That's not a correct fix. We should turn off the node count in Explain
> output. Use EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) as a
> general rule. In case of single node reduction tests, we may use num_nodes
> on, but in that case num_nodes will always be 1, and will not change
> depending upon cluster configuration.
>
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...>wrote:
>
>> I found the regression failure was due to the change of explain output.
>> Original expected output uses node count = 3, which is not correct because
>> regression test is configured with only two datanode.   Actual result says
>> node count = 2 which is correct.
>>
>> Attached is a patch for the correction.
>>
>> Regards;
>> ----------
>> Koichi Suzuki
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EntepriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>
>
>


-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EntepriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] xc_sort regression failure fix

[Ashutosh B. <ash...@en...>]

Hi Suzuki-san,
There are syntax errors in expected output in your patch. The right way to
invoke EXPLAIN is
EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) <query>

In your patch it is used as
EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) verbose <query>
that's why it's giving syntax error.

Also, you have use cost off instead of cost*s* off.


On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:01 AM, 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...> wrote:

> Here's the second fix.
>
> Regards;
> ---
> Koichi Suzuki
>
>
>
>
> On 2013/05/15, at 13:22, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...>
> wrote:
>
> Again in this case, the right fix is to use the standard EXPLAIN form
> EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off).
>
> What I don't understand is how come these changes appeared suddenly?
>
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...>wrote:
>
>> Hello;
>>
>> This failure was caused by the following:
>>
>> 1. Now FQS pushes down order by and there're no sort at coordinator.
>>  Current regression did not reflect this.
>>
>> 2. Regression test changed the datanode name.  Current regression did not
>> reflect this.
>>
>> Enclosed is a fix.
>>
>> Regards;
>> ----------
>> Koichi Suzuki
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EntepriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>
>
>


-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EntepriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] xc_sort regression failure fix

[鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>]

Here's revised fix.   num_nodes off was missing in several explain statements.  This fixes missing options too.

Regards;
---
Koichi Suzuki


On 2013/05/15, at 14:31, 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...> wrote:

> Here's the second fix.
> 
> Regards;
> ---
> Koichi Suzuki
> 
> 
> <fix_xc_sort_1.patch>
> 
> On 2013/05/15, at 13:22, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:
> 
>> Again in this case, the right fix is to use the standard EXPLAIN form EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off).
>> 
>> What I don't understand is how come these changes appeared suddenly?
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...> wrote:
>> Hello;
>> 
>> This failure was caused by the following:
>> 
>> 1. Now FQS pushes down order by and there're no sort at coordinator.  Current regression did not reflect this.
>> 
>> 2. Regression test changed the datanode name.  Current regression did not reflect this.
>> 
>> Enclosed is a fix.
>> 
>> Regards;
>> ----------
>> Koichi Suzuki
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Best Wishes,
>> Ashutosh Bapat
>> EntepriseDB Corporation
>> The Postgres Database Company
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Fix for xc_FQS_join regression

[Abbas B. <abb...@en...>]

Ah, I just received the remaining emails of the chain.

On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>wrote:

> Shouldn't we use
> NODES OFF, NUM_NODES OFF
> so that the test would pass independent of number of nodes in the cluster.
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...>wrote:
>
>> I found the regression failure was due to the change of explain output.
>> Original expected output uses node count = 3, which is not correct because
>> regression test is configured with only two datanode.   Actual result says
>> node count = 2 which is correct.
>>
>> Attached is a patch for the correction.
>>
>> Regards;
>> ----------
>> Koichi Suzuki
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
>> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
>> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
>> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> *Abbas*
>  Architect
>
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>  Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
> *
> Follow us on Twitter*
> @EnterpriseDB
>
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>



-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Fix for xc_FQS_join regression

[Abbas B. <abb...@en...>]

Shouldn't we use
NODES OFF, NUM_NODES OFF
so that the test would pass independent of number of nodes in the cluster.

On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...>wrote:

> I found the regression failure was due to the change of explain output.
> Original expected output uses node count = 3, which is not correct because
> regression test is configured with only two datanode.   Actual result says
> node count = 2 which is correct.
>
> Attached is a patch for the correction.
>
> Regards;
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>


-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Fix for xc_FQS_join regression

[鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>]

I see.   PFA the revised patch.   Some num_node off was missing in explain statements.  They're fixed too.


---
Koichi Suzuki


On 2013/05/15, at 13:17, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:

> That's not a correct fix. We should turn off the node count in Explain output. Use EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) as a general rule. In case of single node reduction tests, we may use num_nodes on, but in that case num_nodes will always be 1, and will not change depending upon cluster configuration.
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...> wrote:
> I found the regression failure was due to the change of explain output.   Original expected output uses node count = 3, which is not correct because regression test is configured with only two datanode.   Actual result says node count = 2 which is correct.
> 
> Attached is a patch for the correction.
> 
> Regards;
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EntepriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] xc_sort regression failure fix

[鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>]

Here's the second fix.

Regards;
---
Koichi Suzuki



On 2013/05/15, at 13:22, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:

> Again in this case, the right fix is to use the standard EXPLAIN form EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off).
> 
> What I don't understand is how come these changes appeared suddenly?
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...> wrote:
> Hello;
> 
> This failure was caused by the following:
> 
> 1. Now FQS pushes down order by and there're no sort at coordinator.  Current regression did not reflect this.
> 
> 2. Regression test changed the datanode name.  Current regression did not reflect this.
> 
> Enclosed is a fix.
> 
> Regards;
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EntepriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] xc_sort regression failure fix

[鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>]

Do you mean we should take xc_sort.sql from older release?
---
Koichi Suzuki



On 2013/05/15, at 13:22, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:

> Again in this case, the right fix is to use the standard EXPLAIN form EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off).
> 
> What I don't understand is how come these changes appeared suddenly?
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...> wrote:
> Hello;
> 
> This failure was caused by the following:
> 
> 1. Now FQS pushes down order by and there're no sort at coordinator.  Current regression did not reflect this.
> 
> 2. Regression test changed the datanode name.  Current regression did not reflect this.
> 
> Enclosed is a fix.
> 
> Regards;
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EntepriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] xc_sort regression failure fix

[Ashutosh B. <ash...@en...>]

Again in this case, the right fix is to use the standard EXPLAIN form
EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off).

What I don't understand is how come these changes appeared suddenly?


On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...>wrote:

> Hello;
>
> This failure was caused by the following:
>
> 1. Now FQS pushes down order by and there're no sort at coordinator.
>  Current regression did not reflect this.
>
> 2. Regression test changed the datanode name.  Current regression did not
> reflect this.
>
> Enclosed is a fix.
>
> Regards;
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>


-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EntepriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Fix for xc_FQS_join regression

[Ashutosh B. <ash...@en...>]

That's not a correct fix. We should turn off the node count in Explain
output. Use EXPLAIN  (verbose, num_nodes off, nodes off, costs off) as a
general rule. In case of single node reduction tests, we may use num_nodes
on, but in that case num_nodes will always be 1, and will not change
depending upon cluster configuration.


On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...>wrote:

> I found the regression failure was due to the change of explain output.
> Original expected output uses node count = 3, which is not correct because
> regression test is configured with only two datanode.   Actual result says
> node count = 2 which is correct.
>
> Attached is a patch for the correction.
>
> Regards;
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>


-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EntepriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Fix for regression tsearch.sql

[Abbas B. <abb...@en...>]

The patch worked fine for me and the changes in the SQL and expected output
are good to go.

On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <
ash...@en...> wrote:

> Hi All,
> Here is regression fix for tsearch.sql.
>
> There were 2 alt expected outputs added (for no reason, I could see).
> ORDER BY clause was previously added to the queries in SQL file, but the
> ouptuts were only updated in alt output file. That's worst way of fixing
> output ordering. Fixed it in this patch. I have removed alternate output
> files.
>
> There was a unique index being created on a table. It was failing because
> the default distribution in distributed (vs replicated). I have changed the
> distribution to replicated and error is gone.
>
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EntepriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>


-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Fix for test case with.sql

[Abbas B. <abb...@en...>]

Adding developers mailing list.

On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>wrote:

> Hi,
> Attached please find a patch to fix test case with.
> There were two issues making the test to fail.
> 1. Updates to partition column were possible using syntax like
>     WITH t AS (UPDATE y SET a=a+1 RETURNING *) SELECT * FROM t
>     The patch blocks this syntax.
>
> 2.  For a WITH query that updates a table in the main query and
>      inserts a row in the same table in the WITH query we need to use
>      command ID communication to remote nodes in order to
>      maintain global data visibility.
>      For example
>      CREATE TEMP TABLE tab (id int,val text) DISTRIBUTE BY REPLICATION;
>      INSERT INTO tab VALUES (1,'p1');
>      WITH wcte AS (INSERT INTO tab VALUES(42,'new') RETURNING id AS newid)
>      UPDATE tab SET id = id + newid FROM wcte;
>      The last query gets translated into the following multi-statement
>      transaction on the primary datanode
>      (a) START TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL read committed READ WRITE
>      (b) INSERT INTO tab (id, val) VALUES ($1, $2) RETURNING id --
> (42,'new)'
>      (c) SELECT id, val, ctid FROM ONLY tab WHERE true
>      (d) UPDATE ONLY tab tab SET id = $1 WHERE (tab.ctid = $3) --
> (43,(0,1)]
>      (e) COMMIT TRANSACTION
>      The command id of the select in step (c), should be such that
>      it does not see the insert of step (b)
>
> Comments are welcome.
>
> Regards
>
> --
> *Abbas*
>  Architect
>
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>  Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
> *
> Follow us on Twitter*
> @EnterpriseDB
>
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>



-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Patch to change name of a couple of variables to more general names

[Abbas B. <abb...@en...>]

Adding developers mailing list.

On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>wrote:

> Hi,
> PFA a patch to change names of a couple of variable to more general names.
> This patch touches some of the areas of command id exchange mechanism
> between nodes of the cluster and we can use this thread to discuss whether
> we need to enable command id exchange in all cases OR not.
> For reference see the patch 38b2b79 committed by Michael for the rest of
> the details of the mechanism.
>
> --
> *Abbas*
>  Architect
>
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>  Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
> *
> Follow us on Twitter*
> @EnterpriseDB
>
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>



-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] GTM standby bugs

[Koichi S. <koi...@gm...>]

I reviewed patches and tested them.   The patch look reasonable and does
not influence the regression.    Because these patches are submitted four
days ago and everybody had good amount of time to think about it, I think
it safe to commit it now.

Please respond to me in an hour if you have any further inputs to this.

Regards;

----------
Koichi Suzuki


2013/5/9 Andrei Martsinchyk <and...@gm...>

> Hi,
>
> We have found few bugs related to GTM standby.
> 1. Missing break; after handling MSG_BKUP_TXN_BEGIN_GETGXID on standby was
> causing error
> "insufficient data left in message". Patch is attached.
> 2. GTM master does not forward information about sequence created to
> standby. Patch is attached, too.
> 3. When restarting cluster with standby, GTM master logs errors "Expecting
> a startup message, but received �". The problem disappears if I remove file
> register.node from the GTM master data directory. Before I start looking
> into details, why GTM needs to save information about running nodes?
> Cluster may be shut down for reconfiguration and information in
> register.node may be out of date. At the same time when nodes connect to
> GTM they deliver actual information.
> So, maybe proper fix for the problem is just to remove code to
> save/restore register.node?
>
> --
> Andrei Martsinchyk
>
> StormDB - http://www.stormdb.com
> The Database Cloud
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Steps to remove coordinator master

[鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>]

Thanks.   Then we will keep the commit.
---
Koichi Suzuki



On 2013/05/13, at 19:33, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:

> I think Amit just suggested we can use some other means that provide similar functionality to execute advisory lock commands on a particular node. This is totally independent of what I just committed. There is no conflicting requirement.
> 
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...> wrote:
> Hello;
> 
> 
> I found the patch by Abbas was committed.   Amit, how does it conflict with your requirement?  Do you have any idea how to resolve this?
> 
> I'm not sure if not using execute direct solves this conflicting requirement.
> 
> Regards;
> 
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
> 
> 
> 2013/5/13 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>
> I'm okay with either case.   I can stop the master until all the coordinator issues DROP NODE and then if the following feature is available, I can exchange the order (of course, stopping the master first is safer and more flexible).
> 
> Could somebody check if Michael's patch is available?
> 
> Regards;
> ---
> Koichi Suzuki
> 
> 
> 
> On 2013/05/13, at 17:28, Amit Khandekar <ami...@en...> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 13 May 2013 11:52, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:
>> Hi Abbas,
>> Why is DROP NODE executing EXEC DIRECT ON? The internal code shouldn't do this. EXEC DIRECT is only for debug purposes and can be deprecated in future. In fact, I am leaning to remove it. It's complicating matters a lot.
>> 
>> DROP NODE does not issue EXECUTE DIRECT, it tries to acquire an advisory lock and our implementation of advisory lock uses EXEC DIRECT. Please take a look at the function pgxc_advisory_lock. Amit can explain it more.
>> 
>> In order to send pg_advisory_lock() in serial manner, one each of the node one after the other, I had to do this. I guess Michael has now written some helper functions to execute commands on particular node, which we can use instead of exec_direct.
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...> wrote:
>> Hello;
>> 
>> I'm testing pgxc_ctl to remove a coordinator master.   Following your suggestions, I first stopped the coordinator master to be removed and then issued "drop node" in all the other coordinators.   Somehow drop node complains that it fails to obtain pooled connection, in fact, in drop node, "execute direct on (node_to_be_removed)" was issued.
>> 
>> It worked fine if the removed coordinator is stopped after all the DROP NODE are successful.
>> 
>> Did you issue CLEAN CONNECTION or pgxc_pool_reload before you issue "DROP NODE"?
>> 
>> No, I did not issue any such statement. I just tested again and I am also getting the following error when I issue DROP NODE
>> test=# drop node coord_2;
>> ERROR:  Failed to get pooled connections
>> CONTEXT:  SQL statement "EXECUTE DIRECT ON (coord_2) 'SELECT pg_catalog.pg_try_advisory_xact_lock_shared(65535, 0)'"
>> test=# 
>>  
>> This is a bug and has to be fixed. The bug is that DROP NODE should not be trying to acquire the lock. I will send a fix for this today. The steps remain the same as before.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Regards;
>> ----------
>> Koichi Suzuki
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> -- 
>> Abbas
>> Architect
>> 
>> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>> Skype ID: gabbasb
>> www.enterprisedb.com
>> 
>> Follow us on Twitter
>> @EnterpriseDB 
>> 
>> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
>> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
>> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Best Wishes,
>> Ashutosh Bapat
>> EntepriseDB Corporation
>> The Postgres Database Company
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> -- 
>> Abbas
>> Architect
>> 
>> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>> Skype ID: gabbasb
>> www.enterprisedb.com
>> 
>> Follow us on Twitter
>> @EnterpriseDB 
>> 
>> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
>> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
>> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and 
>> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed 
>> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now. 
>> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may_______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -- 
> Abbas
> Architect
> 
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
> Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.com
> 
> Follow us on Twitter
> @EnterpriseDB 
> 
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more

[Postgres-xc-developers] 1.0.3 source code

[Michael M. <me...@po...>]

Hi,

I just noted that the 1.0.3 release notes have a typo or better are missing a
line. Patch attached. While looking for this I noticed that git HEAD as well as
REL_1_1_STABLE have no 1.0.3 section in the release notes. I haven't checked
for the other changes, but I wonder if this is an oversight or there is a
reason for not including it.

Michael
-- 
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Steps to remove coordinator master

[Abbas B. <abb...@en...>]

I think Amit just suggested we can use some other means that provide
similar functionality to execute advisory lock commands on a particular
node. This is totally independent of what I just committed. There is no
conflicting requirement.

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...>wrote:

> Hello;
>
>
> I found the patch by Abbas was committed.   Amit, how does it conflict
> with your requirement?  Do you have any idea how to resolve this?
>
> I'm not sure if not using execute direct solves this conflicting
> requirement.
>
> Regards;
>
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
>
>
> 2013/5/13 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>
>
>> I'm okay with either case.   I can stop the master until all the
>> coordinator issues DROP NODE and then if the following feature is
>> available, I can exchange the order (of course, stopping the master first
>> is safer and more flexible).
>>
>> Could somebody check if Michael's patch is available?
>>
>> Regards;
>>  ---
>> Koichi Suzuki
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2013/05/13, at 17:28, Amit Khandekar <ami...@en...>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 13 May 2013 11:52, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Ashutosh Bapat <
>>> ash...@en...> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Abbas,
>>>> Why is DROP NODE executing EXEC DIRECT ON? The internal code shouldn't
>>>> do this. EXEC DIRECT is only for debug purposes and can be deprecated in
>>>> future. In fact, I am leaning to remove it. It's complicating matters a lot.
>>>>
>>>
>>> DROP NODE does not issue EXECUTE DIRECT, it tries to acquire an advisory
>>> lock and our implementation of advisory lock uses EXEC DIRECT. Please take
>>> a look at the function pgxc_advisory_lock. Amit can explain it more.
>>>
>>
>> In order to send pg_advisory_lock() in serial manner, one each of the
>> node one after the other, I had to do this. I guess Michael has now written
>> some helper functions to execute commands on particular node, which we can
>> use instead of exec_direct.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Abbas Butt <
>>>> abb...@en...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Koichi Suzuki <
>>>>> koi...@gm...> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm testing pgxc_ctl to remove a coordinator master.   Following your
>>>>>> suggestions, I first stopped the coordinator master to be removed and then
>>>>>> issued "drop node" in all the other coordinators.   Somehow drop node
>>>>>> complains that it fails to obtain pooled connection, in fact, in drop node,
>>>>>> "execute direct on (node_to_be_removed)" was issued.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It worked fine if the removed coordinator is stopped after all the
>>>>>> DROP NODE are successful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did you issue CLEAN CONNECTION or pgxc_pool_reload before you issue
>>>>>> "DROP NODE"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I did not issue any such statement. I just tested again and I am
>>>>> also getting the following error when I issue DROP NODE
>>>>> test=# drop node coord_2;
>>>>> ERROR:  Failed to get pooled connections
>>>>> CONTEXT:  SQL statement "EXECUTE DIRECT ON (coord_2) 'SELECT
>>>>> pg_catalog.pg_try_advisory_xact_lock_shared(65535, 0)'"
>>>>> test=#
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a bug and has to be fixed. The bug is that DROP NODE should
>>>>> not be trying to acquire the lock. I will send a fix for this today. The
>>>>> steps remain the same as before.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards;
>>>>>> ----------
>>>>>> Koichi Suzuki
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> --
>>>>> *Abbas*
>>>>>  Architect
>>>>>
>>>>> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>>>>>  Skype ID: gabbasb
>>>>> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
>>>>> *
>>>>> Follow us on Twitter*
>>>>> @EnterpriseDB
>>>>>
>>>>> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>>>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>>>>> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
>>>>> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
>>>>> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>>>>> Pos...@li...
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Wishes,
>>>> Ashutosh Bapat
>>>> EntepriseDB Corporation
>>>> The Postgres Database Company
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> *Abbas*
>>>  Architect
>>>
>>> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>>>  Skype ID: gabbasb
>>> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
>>> *
>>> Follow us on Twitter*
>>> @EnterpriseDB
>>>
>>> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>>> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
>>> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
>>> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>>> Pos...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
>> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
>> Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may_______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
>> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
>> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>


-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Steps to remove coordinator master

[Koichi S. <koi...@gm...>]

Hello;


I found the patch by Abbas was committed.   Amit, how does it conflict with
your requirement?  Do you have any idea how to resolve this?

I'm not sure if not using execute direct solves this conflicting
requirement.

Regards;

----------
Koichi Suzuki


2013/5/13 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>

> I'm okay with either case.   I can stop the master until all the
> coordinator issues DROP NODE and then if the following feature is
> available, I can exchange the order (of course, stopping the master first
> is safer and more flexible).
>
> Could somebody check if Michael's patch is available?
>
> Regards;
> ---
> Koichi Suzuki
>
>
>
> On 2013/05/13, at 17:28, Amit Khandekar <ami...@en...>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 13 May 2013 11:52, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Ashutosh Bapat <
>> ash...@en...> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Abbas,
>>> Why is DROP NODE executing EXEC DIRECT ON? The internal code shouldn't
>>> do this. EXEC DIRECT is only for debug purposes and can be deprecated in
>>> future. In fact, I am leaning to remove it. It's complicating matters a lot.
>>>
>>
>> DROP NODE does not issue EXECUTE DIRECT, it tries to acquire an advisory
>> lock and our implementation of advisory lock uses EXEC DIRECT. Please take
>> a look at the function pgxc_advisory_lock. Amit can explain it more.
>>
>
> In order to send pg_advisory_lock() in serial manner, one each of the node
> one after the other, I had to do this. I guess Michael has now written some
> helper functions to execute commands on particular node, which we can use
> instead of exec_direct.
>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Abbas Butt <
>>> abb...@en...> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Koichi Suzuki <
>>>> koi...@gm...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello;
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm testing pgxc_ctl to remove a coordinator master.   Following your
>>>>> suggestions, I first stopped the coordinator master to be removed and then
>>>>> issued "drop node" in all the other coordinators.   Somehow drop node
>>>>> complains that it fails to obtain pooled connection, in fact, in drop node,
>>>>> "execute direct on (node_to_be_removed)" was issued.
>>>>>
>>>>> It worked fine if the removed coordinator is stopped after all the
>>>>> DROP NODE are successful.
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you issue CLEAN CONNECTION or pgxc_pool_reload before you issue
>>>>> "DROP NODE"?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, I did not issue any such statement. I just tested again and I am
>>>> also getting the following error when I issue DROP NODE
>>>> test=# drop node coord_2;
>>>> ERROR:  Failed to get pooled connections
>>>> CONTEXT:  SQL statement "EXECUTE DIRECT ON (coord_2) 'SELECT
>>>> pg_catalog.pg_try_advisory_xact_lock_shared(65535, 0)'"
>>>> test=#
>>>>
>>>> This is a bug and has to be fixed. The bug is that DROP NODE should not
>>>> be trying to acquire the lock. I will send a fix for this today. The steps
>>>> remain the same as before.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards;
>>>>> ----------
>>>>> Koichi Suzuki
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> *Abbas*
>>>>  Architect
>>>>
>>>> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>>>>  Skype ID: gabbasb
>>>> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
>>>> *
>>>> Follow us on Twitter*
>>>> @EnterpriseDB
>>>>
>>>> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>>>> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
>>>> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
>>>> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>>>> Pos...@li...
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Wishes,
>>> Ashutosh Bapat
>>> EntepriseDB Corporation
>>> The Postgres Database Company
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> *Abbas*
>>  Architect
>>
>> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>>  Skype ID: gabbasb
>> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
>> *
>> Follow us on Twitter*
>> @EnterpriseDB
>>
>> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
>> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
>> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Steps to remove coordinator master

[鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...>]

I'm okay with either case.   I can stop the master until all the coordinator issues DROP NODE and then if the following feature is available, I can exchange the order (of course, stopping the master first is safer and more flexible).

Could somebody check if Michael's patch is available?

Regards;
---
Koichi Suzuki



On 2013/05/13, at 17:28, Amit Khandekar <ami...@en...> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 13 May 2013 11:52, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Ashutosh Bapat <ash...@en...> wrote:
> Hi Abbas,
> Why is DROP NODE executing EXEC DIRECT ON? The internal code shouldn't do this. EXEC DIRECT is only for debug purposes and can be deprecated in future. In fact, I am leaning to remove it. It's complicating matters a lot.
> 
> DROP NODE does not issue EXECUTE DIRECT, it tries to acquire an advisory lock and our implementation of advisory lock uses EXEC DIRECT. Please take a look at the function pgxc_advisory_lock. Amit can explain it more.
> 
> In order to send pg_advisory_lock() in serial manner, one each of the node one after the other, I had to do this. I guess Michael has now written some helper functions to execute commands on particular node, which we can use instead of exec_direct.
>  
>  
> 
> 
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...> wrote:
> Hello;
> 
> I'm testing pgxc_ctl to remove a coordinator master.   Following your suggestions, I first stopped the coordinator master to be removed and then issued "drop node" in all the other coordinators.   Somehow drop node complains that it fails to obtain pooled connection, in fact, in drop node, "execute direct on (node_to_be_removed)" was issued.
> 
> It worked fine if the removed coordinator is stopped after all the DROP NODE are successful.
> 
> Did you issue CLEAN CONNECTION or pgxc_pool_reload before you issue "DROP NODE"?
> 
> No, I did not issue any such statement. I just tested again and I am also getting the following error when I issue DROP NODE
> test=# drop node coord_2;
> ERROR:  Failed to get pooled connections
> CONTEXT:  SQL statement "EXECUTE DIRECT ON (coord_2) 'SELECT pg_catalog.pg_try_advisory_xact_lock_shared(65535, 0)'"
> test=# 
>  
> This is a bug and has to be fixed. The bug is that DROP NODE should not be trying to acquire the lock. I will send a fix for this today. The steps remain the same as before.
> 
>  
> 
> Regards;
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -- 
> Abbas
> Architect
> 
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
> Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.com
> 
> Follow us on Twitter
> @EnterpriseDB 
> 
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EntepriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -- 
> Abbas
> Architect
> 
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
> Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.com
> 
> Follow us on Twitter
> @EnterpriseDB 
> 
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and 
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed 
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now. 
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers

Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Patch for trigger shippability

[Ashutosh B. <ash...@en...>]

Hi Amit,
We now have Query structure in RemoteQuery. This corresponds to the query
being fired on the datanodes. THe commandType here should tell you whether
it's DELETE or not.


On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Amit Khandekar <
ami...@en...> wrote:

> In case of multiple triggers of the same type for a given table, the
> requirement is that they should be fired in alphabetical order. To do so,
> we need to fire either all of them on coordinator, or all of them on
> datanode. The main changes in the attached patch are related to this
> requirement.
>
> All of the Exec*Trigger() functions now execute should_exec_trigger*()
> functions that return true if the node on which they are run is the right
> node to execute those type of triggers.
>
> Also for BR triggers, the additional requirement is that they should be
> run on coordinator if AR triggers are not shippable, regardless of whether
> BR themselves are shippable or not. This is because, if we fire BR triggers
> on datanode, they might change the final row updated, and so we need to
> again fetch the new row back to the coordinator. Instead, if we fire them
> on coordinator, we already know what's the final row. Also, we would have
> required additional changes to add RETURNING to the remote query to fetch
> the final updated row.
>
> Constraint triggers are exception; we need to fire them always on
> datanode. Once we support global constraints, these need not be specially
> handled.
>
> I was trying to avoid the should_exec_trigger*() calls for each of the
> Exec*Trigger() functions by doing this in TriggerEnabled() because it is a
> common function called for all triggers. But the issue is, for AFTER
> triggers, it is called with a different set of  event type values than the
> usual  TRIGGER_TYPE* values. For AFTER triggers, TRIGGER_EVENT_* values are
> used. Anyways, TriggerEnabled() is called for each of the trigger.
>
> The trigger shippability helper functions are now completely changed.
> pgxc_find_nonshippable_row_trig() is the key function. The comments in
> these functions should give a fair idea of their functionality.
>
>
> For stmt shippability, the trigger functions are now explicitly called if
> it's not an internally generated query. rq_internal_params field is used to
> know that this DML is user-supplied query (that is, it would be FQS). The
> functions are called in RemoteQueryNext().
>
>
> THere is another patch (relaccess_type.patch) that you need to first apply
> before the main patch (trig_shippability.patch) is applied. I had to add
> another RELATION_ACCESS_DELETE in ExecNodes. To handle the stmt triggers, I
> had to know whether the statement is DELETE or INSERT or UPDATE.
>
> The new test xc_trigship is added.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
> leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
> Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>


-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EntepriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company