Mailing lists [pgsql-hackers]

5 June 2015

• 00:29   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Robert Haas
• 00:35   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Robert Haas
• 00:45   Re: [idea] more aggressive join pushdown on postgres_fdw Robert Haas
• 00:51   Re: Minor improvement to func.sgml Robert Haas
• 00:59   Re: [PATCH] Fix documentation bug in how to calculate the quasi-unique pg_log session_id Robert Haas
• 02:47   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Thomas Munro
• 02:53   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Craig Ringer
• 03:14   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Andrew Dunstan
• 03:32   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Andrew Dunstan
• 03:43   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Peter Geoghegan
• 03:50   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Peter Geoghegan
• 04:03   Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Map basebackup tablespaces using a tablespace_map file Amit Kapila
• 04:41   Re: [idea] more aggressive join pushdown on postgres_fdw Kouhei Kaigai
• 04:47   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Thomas Munro
• 04:58   Re: [idea] more aggressive join pushdown on postgres_fdw Robert Haas
• 04:59   Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Map basebackup tablespaces using a tablespace_map file Andrew Dunstan
• 05:15   Incorrect order of database-locking operations in InitPostgres() Tom Lane
• 05:36   Re: [idea] more aggressive join pushdown on postgres_fdw Kouhei Kaigai
• 06:35   Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Map basebackup tablespaces using a tablespace_map file Amit Kapila
• 06:39   Re: Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial) Michael Paquier
• 07:27   Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Map basebackup tablespaces using a tablespace_map file Andrew Dunstan
• 07:28   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Michael Paquier
• 08:21   Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Map basebackup tablespaces using a tablespace_map file Amit Kapila
• 09:20   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Noah Misch
• 09:50   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Simon Riggs
• 10:21   Handle PGRES_COPY_BOTH in psql for logical replication? Shulgin, Oleksandr
• 10:25   Re: Restore-reliability mode Simon Riggs
• 10:26   Re: Handle PGRES_COPY_BOTH in psql for logical replication? Andres Freund
• 10:34   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Jim Nasby
• 10:44   Re: Handle PGRES_COPY_BOTH in psql for logical replication? Shulgin, Oleksandr
• 11:22   Re: Handle PGRES_COPY_BOTH in psql for logical replication? Andres Freund
• 11:59   Re: Handle PGRES_COPY_BOTH in psql for logical replication? Shulgin, Oleksandr
• 12:45   Re: Multixid hindsight design Simon Riggs
• 12:52   Re: [idea] more aggressive join pushdown on postgres_fdw Shigeru HANADA
• 13:02   Re: Multixid hindsight design Andres Freund
• 13:17   Re: Multixid hindsight design Simon Riggs
• 13:18   Re: Multixid hindsight design Simon Riggs
• 13:52   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Thomas Munro
• 14:51   pg_stat_*_columns? Joel Jacobson
• 14:56   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Robert Haas
• 15:21   Re: nested loop semijoin estimates Robert Haas
• 15:33   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Stephen Frost
• 16:39   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Robert Haas
• 16:42   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Simon Riggs
• 16:45   Re: Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial) Fujii Masao
• 16:46   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Robert Haas
• 17:00   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Robert Haas
• 17:08   Re: Multixid hindsight design Robert Haas
• 17:24   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Tom Lane
• 17:28   Re: Multixid hindsight design Tom Lane
• 17:42   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Joshua D. Drake
• 17:46   Re: Multixid hindsight design Robert Haas
• 18:05   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Andrew Dunstan
• 18:05   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Bruce Momjian
• 18:11   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Bruce Momjian
• 18:18   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Simon Riggs
• 18:21   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Robert Haas
• 18:23   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Simon Riggs
• 18:28   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely David Fetter
• 18:36   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Andres Freund
• 18:40   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Tom Lane
• 18:42   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Neil Tiffin
• 18:44   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Tom Lane
• 18:44   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Alvaro Herrera
• 18:50   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely David E. Wheeler
• 18:51   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Andres Freund
• 18:52   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Bruce Momjian
• 18:55   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Simon Riggs
• 18:55   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Jim Nasby
• 19:00   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Andres Freund
• 19:06   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Jim Nasby
• 19:07   Is it possible to have a "fast-write" Index? deavid
• 19:08   Re: cannot set view triggers to replica Kevin Grittner
• 19:20   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Alvaro Herrera
• 19:27   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Alvaro Herrera
• 19:29   Warn about using single user + standby_mode Andres Freund
• 19:56   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Robert Haas
• 20:23   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Andrew Dunstan
• 20:38   Re: pg_stat_*_columns? Jim Nasby
• 20:39   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Peter Geoghegan
• 20:46   Re: Is it possible to have a "fast-write" Index? Jim Nasby
• 20:48   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Jim Nasby
• 20:51   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Andrew Dunstan
• 20:51   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely David E. Wheeler
• 20:59   Re: Is it possible to have a "fast-write" Index? Tom Lane
• 21:09   Re: Is it possible to have a "fast-write" Index? Claudio Freire
• 21:12   Re: Is it possible to have a "fast-write" Index? Alvaro Herrera
• 21:27   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Robert Haas
• 21:28   gcc -ansi versus SSE4.2 detection Tom Lane
• 21:33   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Alvaro Herrera
• 21:33   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Tom Lane
• 21:37   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Alvaro Herrera
• 21:41   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Josh Berkus
• 21:53   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Andres Freund
• 21:57   Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode Peter Geoghegan
• 22:03   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Alvaro Herrera
• 22:03   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Steve Kehlet
• 22:04   Re: gcc -ansi versus SSE4.2 detection Heikki Linnakangas
• 22:09   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Petr Jelinek
• 22:09   Re: gcc -ansi versus SSE4.2 detection Tom Lane
• 22:16   Re: gcc -ansi versus SSE4.2 detection Heikki Linnakangas
• 22:27   Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely Jeff Janes
• 22:31   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Jim Nasby
• 22:52   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Alvaro Herrera
• 23:02   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Robert Haas
• 23:03   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Robert Haas
• 23:05   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Andrew Dunstan
• 23:40   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Andres Freund
• 23:48   Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation Tom Lane
• 23:56   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Tom Lane
• 23:59   Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 Joshua D. Drake